uc 


^B    MD5    S2T 


LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

University  of  California. 

RECEIVED    BY    EXCHANGE 

Class 

CORNELL  STUDIES 

IN 

HISTORY  AND  POLITICAL  SCIENCE 


ISSUED  BY 

THE  PRESIDENT  WHITE  SCHOOL 

CORNELL    UNIVERSITY 


VOLUME   II 


WESTERN  ASIA 


IN  THE 


DAYS   OF  SARGON   OF   ASSYRIA 


722-705  B.  C. 


A  STUDY   IN   ORIENTAL  HISTORY 


HY 


A.  T.  OLMSTEAD,  Ph.D. 

LATK    THAYER    FELLOW,    AMERICAN    SCHOOL    FOR   ORIENTAL   STUDIES    AT   JERUSALEM 


OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY 

OF 


NEW  YORK 
HENRY  HOLT  AND  COMPANY 

1908 


-7' 


.  l\\^ 

i>^^^^ 


Copyright,  1908 
By  Cornell  University 


INTRODUCTION 

The  present  work  is  a  thesis  presented  to  the  President 
White  School  of  History  and  Political  Science  at  Cornell 
University,  and  is  published  as  one  of  its  studies.  It  is  an 
attempt  to  investigate  methodically  a  brief  period  of  Ori- 
ental history,  interesting  alike  to  the  Assyriologist,  the 
Biblical  scholar,  and  the  student  of  classical  antiquity. 

I  began  the  study  of  theSargon  inscriptions  with  Pro- 
fessor Schmidt  in  1901.  A  year  later  this  subject  was 
chosen  for  my  thesis  for  the  degree  of  Master  of  Arts  from 
Cornell  University.  The  year  1 903-1 904  was  spent  in  prep- 
aration for  a  trip  to  Syria  lasting  from  May,  1904,  to  August, 
1905,  while  I  was  Fellow  of  the  American  School  for  Ori- 
ental Studies  at  Jerusalem.  In  preparation  for  this  trip  a 
collection  of  the  published  Assyrian  data  relating  to  Syria 
had  been  made,  and  these  were  again  studied  in  Syria. 
The  towns  of  Hamath,  Cimirra,  Damascus,  Tyre,  Samaria, 
Ashdod,  Gaza,  and  Raphia,  actually  mentioned  by  the 
scribes  of  Sargon,  were  visited.  The  Mugri  question,  so 
important  for  our  whole  conception  of  Sargon's  Syrian 
policy,  was  studied  in  the  Negeb  itself.  Possibly  most  valu- 
able of  all  was  the  constant  and  very  close  contact  with  the 
natives  of  all  conditions,  nations,  and  religions. 

Among  points  to  which  special  attention  may  perhaps  be 
invited  in  this  work  are  the  chronological  clue  to  the  eponym 
canon  fragment,  the  utilization  and  placing  together  of  the 
fragments  of  Prism  B,  the  use  of  which  has  materially 
modified  the  chronology  of  the  reign,  the  discussion  of  the 
Negeb  and  Mugri  question  from  a  personal  knowledge  of  the 

182241 


VI  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

field,  the  relegation  of  the  Dur  Sharrukin  group  to  its  proper 
place,  and  the  reconstruction  of  the  history  on  the  basis  ot 
the  topography,  resulting  in  a  number  of  new  identifications, 
especially  in  Asia  Minor. 

Credit  should  be  given  to  those  who  have  generously  af- 
forded me  help.  I  desire  to  express  my  thanks  to  my  friends, 
Mr.  B.  B.  Charles,  assistant  in  Semitics  at  Cornell,  and  Mr. 
J.  E.  Wrench,  fellow  in  history  at  Wisconsin,  both  of 
whom  were  with  me  in  Syria,  for  many  suggestions.  Pro- 
fessor J.  R.  S.  Sterrett,  who  has  an  intimate  personal 
knowledge  of  Asia  Minor,  has  often  rendered  important 
assistance.  From  Professor  G.  L.  Burr  I  have  received 
valuable  aid  in  applying  a  strict  historical  method,  and 
Professor  H.  A.  Sill  has  helped  on  the  side  of  classical 
history.  Above  all,  I  owe  a  heavy  debt  of  gratitude  to  Pro- 
fessor N.  Schmidt.  For  eight  years  it  has  been  my  good 
fortune  to  be  closely  associated  with  him,  first  as  student, 
and  then  as  assistant,  both  at  Cornell  University  and  later 
in  Syria.  To  him  I  owe  my  knowledge  of  Semitic  lan- 
guages and  Oriental  history.  In  a  very  real  sense  this  work 
owes  to  his  inspiration  both  its  origin  and  its  completion. 

A.  T.  Olmstead. 

The  President  White  Library, 
Cornell  University, 
June  8,  1906. 


CONTENTS 

Introduction    • v 

The  Sources  i 

Accession    25 

Babylonia  and  Syria  43 

The  Northwest  Frontier 81 

The  Armenian  Wars  1 03 

The  Median  Wars 117 

The  Elamitish  Wars  and  The  Conquest  of  Babylon  i  29 

The  Last  Years 1 48 

The  Culture  Life    1 60 


>       OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY 

OF 


WESTERN  ASIA  IN  THE   DAYS  OF  SARGON 
OF  ASSYRIA,  722-70^  B.  C. 


CHAPTER   I 

THE  SOURCES 


The  resurrection  of  the  Assyrian  world  and  the  discovery 
of  Sargon  are  synchronous.  Prior  to  1843,  when  Botta 
made  his  first  excavations,  it  was  no  exaggeration  to  say 
that  "  a  case  scarcely  three  feet  square  enclosed  all  that 
remained,  not  only  of  the  great  city,  Nineveh,  but  of  Baby- 
lon itself."  ^  When  that  scholar  left  his  consulate  at  Bagh- 
dad to  excavate  in  the  huge  shapeless  mound  of  Khorsabad, 
a  new  world  came  into  being.  A  new  people  and  a  new 
language,  new  customs  and  a  new  art,  surprised  the  world; 
and  Sargon,  thus  far  known  only  by  a  single  reference  in 
the  Bible,^  suddenly  took  his  place  by  the  side  of  Cyrus  or 
Croesus  as  one  of  the  great  monarchs  of  the  ancient  Orient. 

The  first  efforts  of  Botta  were  confined  almost  entirely  to 
the  securing  of  bas-reliefs  and  inscriptions.^  A  later  expe- 
dition, led  by  Place  in  1851,  yielded  a  less  rich  booty  of  such 
finds,  but,  by  the  careful  uncovering  of  the  whole  palace 
mound,  gave  us  what  is  still  the  best  plan  of  an  Assyrian 

*A.  H.  Layard,  Nineveh  and  its  Remains,  1849,  xxv. 

*  Isaiah  20^. 

'  The  first  results  were  published  in  Journal  Asiatique,  IV  Series, 
vols.  II-IV,  and  later  as  a  separate  work  by  Botta,  Lettres  sur  les 
decoiivertes  de  Khorsabad,  1845,  the  definitive  edition  of  the  results  in 
Botta  and  Flandin,  Monuments  de  Ninive,  1849-50. 


2  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

palace.*  Another  expedition,  though  adding  nothing  to  our 
Assyrian  material,  gave  Oppert  an  opportunity  of  studying 
the  inscriptions  and  remains  in  situ.^ 

Thus  for  a  considerable  period,  Sargon  and  his  works 
were  the  most  important  matters  Assyriologists  had  for 
discussion.  But  as  new  sites  were  excavated  and  new  docu- 
ments were  found,  the  interest  gradually  shifted  to  other 
fields  where  more  hope  of  startling  discoveries  was  to  be 
had.  And,  indeed,  there  is  little  reason  to  look  for  many 
new  historical  documents  of  Sargon's  reign  being  found; 
for  the  palace  he  built  has  been  thoroughly  excavated  and 
most  of  the  other  places  he  occupied  have  been  more  or  less 
fully  explored.  From  the  philological  side  there  is  no 
likelihood  of  great  change,  and  the  standard  edition  by 
Winckler^  is  nearly  final. 

But  though  there  is  little  call  for  a  re-editing  of  the  texts, 
two  causes  make  a  re-writing  of  the  history  very  necessary. 
On  the  one  hand,  a  large  amount  of  new  material  has  be- 
come available.  This  is  not,  of  course,  to  any  great  extent 
of  a  historical  nature.  But  in  the  wealth  of  letters,  charters, 
business  documents,  and  other  material  of  this  sort,  we  are 
not  so  very  diffierently  situated  from  the  historian  of  Medi- 
aeval Europe  who  uses  the  same  kind  of  documents  to  check 
and  amplify  his  chronicles. 

But  even  more  important  is  the  change  in  our  attitude 
toward  these  sources.  We  no  longer  are  content  with  a 
collection,  however  exhaustive,  of  the  material.  We  must 
first  criticize  our  sources  and  then  interpret  them,  not  only 
in  sympathy  with  the  past,  but  with  special  reference  to  the 
historical  demands  of  our  own  day.  Let  us  see  how  all 
this  affects  our  estimates  of  these  inscriptions. 

*V.  Place,  Ninive  et  I'Assyrie,  1867-70. 

''J.  Oppert,  Expedition  Scientiiique  en  Mesopotamie,  1859-63. 

•^  H.  Winckler,  Die  Keilschrifttexte  Sargons,  1889. 


THE    SOURCES  3 

At  first  sight,  nothing  could  be  more  certain  than  the  ac- 
curacy of  these  sources.  We  have  here  no  manuscripts 
corrupted  by  frequent  copying.  Our  documents  are  origi- 
nals, and,  what  is  more,  are  the  productions  of  contempo- 
raries whose  results  are  given  us  stamped  with  the  stamp  of 
official  approval.  Other  reasons,  no  less  potent  though  less 
recognized  and  less  legitimate,  were  the  natural  prejudice 
in  favor  of  the  newest  discoveries,  especially  when  dis- 
covered in  so  wonderful  a  way,  and  the  even  more  natural 
feeling  of  favor  with  which  Christian  men  and  women 
viewed  the  documents,  risen  from  the  earth,  which  so  often 
refuted  the  over-zealous  "  higher  critic."  ^ 

Our  report  must  be  much  less  favorable.  These  records 
are  official.  In  that  fact  lies  their  strength  and  their  weak- 
ness. The  opportunities  for  securing  the  truth  were  ample. 
Royal  scribes  accompanied  the  various  expeditions^  and  the 
archive  chambers  were  full  of  detailed  reports  from  com- 
manders in  the  field.  But,  like  all  official  records,  ancient 
or  modern,  these  documents  have  been  edited  to  a  degree  of 
which  it  is  difficult  to  conceive.  A  few  examples  may  not  be 
out  of  place  to  show  how  far  from  trustworthy  they  are. 
Sometimes  a  foreign  source  may  afford  the  needed  correc- 
tion, as  when  Rusash  of  Haldia  turns  up  safe,  sound,  and 
victorious  enough  to  erect  the  Topsana  stele  some  time  after 
the  suicide  the  Assyrian  scribes  so  pathetically  describe,  or 
as  when  the  Hebrew  account®  declares  that  the  leader  of  the 
Ashdod  expedition  was  the  Tartan  and  not  the  king^^  hifti- 

^  S.  Karppe,  Les  Documents  historiques  de  la  Chaldee  et  de  I'Assyrie 
et  la  Verite,  Revue  Semitique,  1894,  347  if.,  is  rather  trite  but  marks  a 
step  in  the  right  direction. 

'For  the  gittai  officials  who  went  as  scribes  to  the  field  of  battle, 
compare  Johns,  Deeds,  II.   168. 

"  Isaiah,  /.  c. 

"  As  claimed  by  Sargon,  Prism  B. 


4  WESTERN   ASIA   IN    THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

self,  or  as  when  from  the  Babylonian  chronicle  we  learn 
that  the  victory  Sargon  claims  to  have  won  at  Dur  ilu  was 
really  a  defeat.^^  In  each  of  these  cases  there  was  every 
inducement  for  Sargon's  scribes  not  to  tell  the  truth,  while 
the  foreign  writers  were  under  much  less  temptation. 

But  sometimes  we  do  not  need  to  go  beyond  Sargon  him- 
self. Out  of  his  own  mouth  we  may  convict  him  of  un- 
truth. Note,  for  example,  the  three  accounts  of  the  fate  of 
Merodach  Baladan.  In  one  he  is  captured.^^  In  the  second 
he  begs  for  peace.^^  In  the  third,  he  runs  away  and  es- 
capes.^* Naturally,  we  are  inclined  to  accept  the  last,  and 
this  is  confirmed  by  the  later  course  of  events.^^  But  such 
an  occurrence  raises  a  doubt  in  our  mind  as  to  the  accuracy 
of  other  cases  where  the  official  accounts  do  not  agree  among 
themselves.  When,  for  instance,  we  have  one  account  of 
the  Ashdod  expedition  in  which  we  are  told  that  lamani 
was  captured^^  and  another  where  we  learn  that  he  fled 
to  Meluhha  whence  he  was  brought  back,^^  we  are  inclined 
to  wonder  if  he  did  not  really  escape.^^ 

Another  question  and  one  which  must  aflfect  our  esti- 
mate of  Sargon's  character,  is  how  far  the  use  of  the  first 
person  actually  means  personal  command  in  the  field.  In 
one  or  two  cases,^®  where  the  absurdity  of  this  would  have 
been  self-evident,  due  credit  is  given  to  the  local  commander. 
The  use  of  the  first  person  means  no  more  than  does  the 
triumph  of  a  Roman  emperor  mean  that  he  was  in  the  field 

"  Cf.  the  study  of  the  battle  of  Dur  ilu  in  chapter  III. 
"D.   133. 

"Annals  V;  cf.  F.  Peiser,  Zeitschrift  fiir  Assyriologte,  1889,  412  ff. 
"A.  349. 

"See  further  in  chapter  VII.  n.  57. 
■  "A.  225. 
"D.  112. 

"  Cf.  chapter  III.  n.  68. 
"A.  307,  393,  408. 


THE   SOURCES  5 

himself.  In  many  cases  it  would  clearly  have  been  impos- 
sible for  Sargon  to  have  been  in  widely  separated  parts  of 
the  empire  at  practically  the  same  time.  Many  campaigns 
are  too  petty  for  the  great  king  to  have  troubled  himself 
about.  Only  once  does  the  Hebrew  allow  us  to  check  and 
then,  in  the  important  Ashdod  revolt,  it  is  the  Tartan  and 
not  the  king  who  is  in  command.^^  Indeed,  from  the  letters 
and  the  prayers  to  Shamash,^^  we  find  that  it  was  the  ex- 
ception rather  than  the  rule  for  the  king  to  war  at  the 
head  of  his  army.  In  several  cases  it  has  already  been 
recognized  that  we  must  see  separate  movements  under 
separate  commanders  to  the  consequent  clearing  up  of  the 
history.22    Much  must  still  be  done  along  this  line. 

A  mere  reference  may  be  made  here  to  the  exaggerated 
and  discordant  figures  given  in  the  various  documents.  The 
plea  of  Oriental  disregard  for  numbers  may  be  made,  but  can 
hardly  stand  in  the  face  of  the  small  and  exact  numbers  of 
the  epistolary  literature.  Nor  should  we  forget  the  stereo- 
typed formulae  which  have  no  more  real  meaning  than  have 
the  accounts  of  battles  in  Diodorus.  Enough  has  been 
shown,  it  would  seem,  to  indicate  the  care  with  which  we 
must  study  these  sources,  even  when  their  statements  are 
not  directly  challenged  by  other  evidence.  Even  within  the 
official  inscriptions  themselves  there  are  groups  of  varying 
degrees  of  trustworthiness.  Unfortunately,  the  one  least 
valuable  is  the  fullest,  and  has,  until  the  present,  been  too 
fully  trusted.  Unfortunately,  too,  our  other  evidence  is  of  a 
fragmentary  character  and  so  often  we  must  accept  the 
version  of  the  official  inscriptions  of  this  group  or  trust  to 

=~Cf.  n.  i8. 

"J.  A.  Knudtzon,  Assyrische  Gehete,  1893. 

"A.  Billerbeck,  Susa,  1893,  has  done  this  for  the  Susa  campaigns. 
In  his  Suleimania,  1898,  he  has  done  the  same  for  the  Median  wars. 


6  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

mere  conjecture.  This  group  is  that  comprising  the  various 
documents  dating  from  about  the  year  707  and  coming  down 
to  us  inscribed  on  the  walls  of  Sargon's  new  capital  of  Dur 
Sharrukin.  It  includes  the  Annals,^^  the  Annals  of  Hall 
XIV,^*  the  Display  Inscription,^^  which  form  a  sub-group 
of  larger  inscriptions,  and  a  group  of  smaller  ones  including 
the  Cylinders^^  from  the  foundations,  the  inscriptions  on 
the  Bulls,^^  the  tablets  found  in  the  foundation  stone,^®  those 

'^  The  Annals ;  abbreviated  as  A.,  was  first  published  by  Botta,  op.  cit., 
pis,  70  if.,  104  fF.,  158  ff.  The  latest  and  best  edition  by  Winckler, 
Sargon,  II.  pi.  I  ,fF.  Translated  by  Oppert  in  Place,  Ninive,  II.  309  ff. ; 
in  Les  inscriptions  de  Dour  Sarkayan,  1870  29  ff.;  in  Records  of  the 
Past,  I  Series,  1873  ^v  VII.  21  ^. ;  by  J.  Menant,  Annates  des  Rois 
d'Assyrie,  1874,  158  ^. ;  by  Winckler,  De  Inscriptione  quae  vocatur 
Annalium,  1886;  in  Sargon,  I.  3  ff. 

**  The  various  parts  of  this  inscription  are  published  in  their  place 
with  the  other  versions  of  the  Annals  by  Winckler,  but  in  his  translation 
he  has  collected  them  separately,  placing  them  after  the  Annals  proper. 

2' The  Display  Inscription  is  the  Pastes  of  the  French  and  the 
Prunkinschrift  of  the  Germans.  Text  in  Botta,  op.  cit.,  pi.  93  ff. ; 
Winckler,  Sargon,  II.  pi.  30  if. ;  translated  by  Oppert  and  Menant,  Les 
Pastes  de  Sargon,  1863=:  Journal  Asiatique,  1863-65;  Menant,  Annales, 
180  ff.;  Oppert,  Records  of  the  Past^  IX.  i  ff.;  Winckler,  Sargon,  I.  97 
ff. ;  F.  E.  Peiser,  Keilinschriftliche  Bibliothek,  1889  ff.,  II.  52  ff.  There 
are  four  versions  on  the  walls  of  rooms  IV,  VII,  VIII,  X.  Of  these,  X 
is  nearly  complete  while  the  others  make  only  verbal  changes.  The  date 
is  the  same  as  that  of  A.  since  D.  155-157  =  A.  416-118.  A  further 
limitation  is  found  in  D.  23  where  Sargon  refers  to  his  fifteenth  year 
(707).      Quoted  as  D. 

^Published  by  Place,  Ninive,  II.  291  ff.;  Oppert,  Dour  Sarkayan,  11 
ff.;  I.  R.  36;  D.  G.  Lyon,  Keilschrifttexte  Sargons,  1883,  i  ff.;  Winckler, 
op.  cit.,  II.  pi.  43.  Translated  by  Oppert  in  Place,  /.  c. ;  by  Oppert, 
/.  c;  Menant,  Annales,  199  ff-\  Lyon,  op.  cit.,  30  ff.;  Peiser,  Keilinschr. 
Bibl.,  II.  39  ff.;  A.  Barta  in  R.  F.  Harper,  Assyrian  and  Babylonian 
Literature,  1901,  59  if.  The  variants  are  of  small  importance.  A 
fragment  of  a  somewhat  similar  text  found  at  Jerusalem  is  published 
by  Menant,  Recueil  de  Travaux,  1890   (XIII),  194. 

^  Published  by  Botta,  op.  cit.,  pi.  22  ff. ;  Oppert  in  Place,  op.  cit.,  283 
ff.;  Dour  Sarkayan,  3  ff.;  Lyon,  op.  cit.,  13  if-;  Winckler,  op.  cit.,  XL 
pi.  41  f.    Translated  by  Oppert,  /.  c,  and  Records  of  the  Past^  XL  17  ^.; 


THE    SOURCES  7 

on  the  gate  pavements,^^  and  those  on  the  backs  of  the  sculp- 
tured slabs.^^ 

Of  the  two  sub-groups,  the  first  is  not  only  fuller,  but 
generally  more  accurate,  though  there  are  cases  where  the 
second  seems  to  point  to  a  more  probable  situation.^^  Of  the 
first,  again,  the  Annals  is  the  most  trustworthy  as  well  as 
the  backbone  of  our  chronology.  As  compared  with  the 
other  documents  of  the  Dur  Sharrukin  group,  details  are 
given  most  fully,  numbers  are  still  fairly  reasonable,  and  the 
facts  seem  least  distorted.  Yet  often  the  four  versions  of  the 
Annals  differ  among  themselves  in  a  most  remarkable  man- 
ner^^  and  in  some  cases  two  slightly  differing  accounts  have 

Menant,  op.  cit.,  192  if.;  Lyons,  op.  cit.,  40  i^.  The  inscriptions  are  on 
slabs  under  the  colossi.  A  fragment  in  the  Egyptian  Museum  of  the 
Vatican  is  noted  by  C.  Bezold,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  1886,  229,  cf.  K. 
Badeker,  Central  Italy,  1904,  361.  There  is  a  close  agreement,  often 
verbal,  between  the  Bull  and  the  Cylinder  Inscriptions.      Quoted  as  C. 

-*  Seven  inscriptions  on  slabs  of  gold,  silver,  copper,  lead,  alabaster, 
limestone  (or  tin(?))  and  on  the  chest  itself.  For  a  discussion  of  the 
materials,  cf.  F.  Delitzsch,  Assyrisches  Worterhuch,  1887,  50.  The 
chest  and  two  slabs  were  lost  in  the  Tigris  accident.  The  others  pub- 
lished by  Oppert  in  Place,  op.  cit.,  303  ff. ;  and  in  Dour  Sarkayan,  23  if. ; 
Lyon,  op.  cit.,  20  ff. ;  Winckler,  op.  cit.,  IL  pi.  37  ff.  Translated  by 
Oppert,  /.  c,  and  in  Records  of  the  Past^  XL  31  if.;  Lyon,  op.  cit.,  48  if. 
In  general,  it  belongs  to  the  group  of  minor  inscriptions. 

^  Published  by  Botta,  op.  cit.,  pi.  i  if. ;  Winckler,  op.  cit.,  II.  pi.  37  if. 
Translated  by  Menant,  op.  cit.,  195  if.;  Winckler,  op.  cit.,  136  if.  It  is 
found  on  the  pavements  of  nineteen  gateways.  There  are  five  recensions 
of  which  IV  found  in  nine  gates  is  the  longest  and  most  important. 
Quoted  as  P. 

*>  Published  by  Botta,  op.  cit.,  pi.  164  if.;  Winckler,  op.  cit.,  II.  pi.  40. 
Translated  by  Menant,  op.  cit.,  196  if.;  Winckler,  op.  cit.,  164  if.  It 
is  the  short  display  inscription  placed  on  the  backs  of  the  slabs  so  that, 
even  if  they  fell  away  from  the  walls,  the  name  and  titles  of  Sargon 
could  still  be  seen. 

"  Cf.  chap.  IV.  n.  43. 

"^  Cf .  n.  13  with  n.  12.  There  are  over  a  dozen  such  instances  ac- 
cording to  Winckler,  Ins.  Sarg.,  11. 


8  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

been  incorporated  one  after  the  other.^^  The  greatest  value 
of  the  Annals  lies  in  its  chronology,  for  indeed  without  it 
we  would  have  no  solid  basis  for  the  dating  of  many  events 
of  the  reign  and  no  general  chronology  at  all.  Yet  a  care- 
ful examination  of  its  chronological  data  gives  an  unsatis- 
factory impression.  Under  the  year  710,  for  example,  we 
have  a  brief  account  of  the  events  from  the  accession  of 
Merodach  Baladan,^*  while  at  the  end  of  the  same  year  we 
have  the  account  of  the  "  seizing  the  hands  of  Bel,"  which 
logically  closes  the  Babylonian  campaign,  but  really  belongs 
to  the  following  year.^**  The  section  dealing  with  716,  as 
already  seen,  clearly  contains  the  records  of  more  than  one 
year.^®  The  frontier  wars  were  evidently  chronic,  yet  they 
are  forced  into  the  chronological  scheme.  Nor  does  the 
scheme  agree  with  what  we  find  elsewhere.  It  is  difficult 
to  acknowledge  that  the  scribes  of  Sargon,  near  the  close 
of  his  reign,  did  not  know  or  did  not  care  to  know  the  real 
succession  of  affairs.  The  putting  together  of  the  Prism 
fragments  has  perhaps  given  a  new  point  of  view.  In  the 
earlier  years,  the  date  is  one  year  earlier  than  that  of  the 
Annals,  in  the  later,  two  years.  It  is  simply  inconceivable 
that  in  707  the  scribes  did  not  know  whether  the  Ashdod 
revolt  took  place  four  or  six  years  before.  There  are  two 
distinct  systems  here,  one  in  the  Annals  and  one  in  the 
Prism  B,  both  probably  artificial  to  a  considerable  extent. 
Which  is  more  probable  and  to  how  great  a  degree  either 
is  true  is  a  difficult  question,  but  a  study  of  the  whole 
chronology  seems  to  indicate  that  that  of  Prism  B  should 

^A.    93-94  =  99-100;    264-271=271-277;    278-281=281-284;    cf. 
Winckler,  Sargon,  XXXIV. 
^*A.  228  ff. 
^A.  309  ff. 
^  A,  52  ff.      Cf.  discussion,  chap.  V. 


THE   SOURCES  9 

be  more  trusted,  and  this  seems  to  be  borne  out  by  a  com- 
parison of  the  two.  It  is  difficult  to  explain  the  system  of 
the  Annals  from  that  of  the  Prism,  but  the  reverse  is  easy. 
It  looks  a  little  as  if  there  had  been  a  break  in  the  series 
of  campaigns, — the  Assyrian  Chronicle  has  for  one  year 
"in  the  land,"  that  is,  no  expedition, — and  that  later  the 
scribes  had  padded  out  these  gaps  with  the  events  of  other 
more  crowded  years.^^  A  most  glaring  example  of  the 
inaccuracy  of  the  Annals  is  in  its  dating  the  battle  of  Dur 
ilu  in  721,  whereas  not  only  the  Babylonian  Chronicle,  but 
also  an  official  inscription  of  Sargon  of  very  early  date 
assign  it  to  720.  Again  we  ask:  Why  was  this  transfer 
and  what  really  happened  in  721  ?  Was  that  year  taken 
up  with  putting  down  revolts  ?^^  The  chronology  of  the 
Assyrian  Chronicle  belongs  to  a  group  of  its  own,  but  so 
far  as  its  data  can  be  brought  into  relation  to  the  others,  it 
rather  supports  that  of  the  Prism.^^  But,  however  we  may 
distrust  the  artificial  scheme  of  the  Annals,  we  must  ac- 
knowledge that  the  others  may  also  have  an  artificial  char- 
acter while,  as  the  only  full  and  complete  system,  it  must 
still  be  retained  for  at  least  relative  chronology  in  so  far  as 
an  artificial  system  cannot  be  detected.  A  very  inferior 
version  of  the  Annals  is  that  of  Hall  XIV,  which  omits 
much  and  abandons  the  chronological  order. 

If  the  Annals  had  been  completely  preserved,  there  would 
be  little  use  for  the  Display  Inscription,  but  the  former  is 
so  badly  mutilated  that  the  frequently  literal  quotation  by 
the  latter  is  often  our  only  source.  But  the  accounts  are 
much  abbreviated  and  are  arranged  in  geographical  rather 
than  in  chronological  order,  although  chronology  does  play 
some  part  within  these  sections.    Failure  to  understand  this 

"  See  n.  42. 

""  Cf.  chap.  III.  n.  8. 

"  Cf.  n.  45. 


lO  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE    DAYS    OF    SARGON 

arrangement  has  led  to  sad  mistakes,  an  example  of  which 
is  the  time-honored  error  which  places  an  Arabian  tribute 
,  immediately  after  the  battle  of  Rapihu,  merely  because  the 
two  are  closely  connected  in  this  inscription."*^ 

The  minor  inscriptions  of  this  group  give  but  little  that 
is  new.  There  is  no  chronological  arrangement  and  their 
variant  readings,  though  interesting  to  the  philologist  and 
topographer,  have  but  little  for  the  historian.  The  Cylinders 
seem  to  be  the  earliest  as  they  are  the  most  important.  In 
fact,  so  close  is  the  agreement  in  places  with  the  deed  of  gift 
document  of  714  that  we  may  postulate  an  earlier  date  for 
this,  perhaps  soon  after  the  conquest  of  Babylon.  For  the 
building  of  Dur  Sharrukin,  it  is  our  best  authority  and 
may  perhaps  be  a  source  for  the  accounts  of  the  others, 
while  it  is  often  of  value  for  other  phases  of  the  culture 
life.  The  Larnaka  stele  is  of  interest,  because  it  is  the 
identical  stone  Sargon  sent  to  Cyprus,  as  we  are  informed 
in  the  other  inscriptions.  Its  text  is  comparatively  short, 
but  in  type  it  agrees  rather  with  the  large  than  the  small 
ones.  Sometimes  it  gives  a  more  likely  account,  as  when 
we  have  the  version  of  the  subjection  of  Cyprus  intended 
for  the  Cypriotes  themselves,  or  the  fuller  account  of 
Hamath.  Its  date  is  about  the  same  as  that  of  the  Dur 
Sharrukin  group,  to  which  it  belongs  in  spite  of  its  distant 
location.*^ 

*"  In  D.  z-j  the  tribute  of  Piru  follows  D.  2()  where  Hanunu  of  Gaza 
appears.  These  events  have  been  placed  together  by  E.  Schrader,  Die 
Keilinschriften  und  das  Alte  Testament,^  1872,  285;  ib.,^  1883,  297; 
L.  B.  Paton,  Early  History  of  Syria  and  Palestine,  1901,  247;  G.  S. 
Goodspeed,  History  of  the  Babylonians  and  Assyrians,  1902,  249.  But 
this  a  clear  case"  of  error,  for  D.  27  is  identical  with  A.  97  which  is,  of 
course,  under  715. 

"The  Cyprus  stele  was  first  noted  in  1845  by  L,  Ross,  Reisen  nach 
Kos,  1852,  87  n.  6.  It  had  been  discovered  while  digging  a  cellar  in  an 
otherwise  unexcavated  region  on  the  west  outskirts  of  the  Mariana,  or 


THE    SOURCES  I  I 

A  second  group  would  contain  the  inscriptions  of  the  two 
Prisms.  Prism  A  has  been  fairly  well  studied.  It  gives 
us  the  well-known  Ashdod  revolt,  the  list  of  Median  princes, 
and  a  Dalta  episode.  Prism  B  has  remained  largely  un- 
noticed. The  fragments  have  now  been  arranged,  and  large 
parts  of  four  out  of  eight  columns  recovered.  The  results 
are  in  general  disappointingly  meager  in  all  but  one  direc- 
tion. This  is  the  chronology  which,  however  artificial, 
seems,  as  already  noted,  to  be  more  nearly  correct  than  that 
of  the  Annals.  The  two  prisms,  though  not  identical,  are 
quite  similar.  They  are  of  Annal  type,  though  entirely 
unrelated  to  the  Annals.  They  seem  earlier  than  the  Dur 
Sharrukin  group,  though  they  cannot  be  much  older.  They 
appear  to  come  from  Nineveh,  where  Sargon  would  seem  to 
have  resided  prior  to  his  occupation  of  his  new  capital.*^ 

port  of  Larnaka.  For  location,  cf.  the  map  by  Dozon  in  Corpus  In- 
scriptionum  Semitic  arum,  1881  {f.,  I.  i.  35.  The  stele,  a  large  block 
of  basaltic  stone,  bearing  a  life-size  relief  of  the  king,  was  secured  for 
the  Berlin  Museum  by  M.  Mattei,  Prussian  Consul  in  Cyprus.  Re- 
ported by  Mas  Latrie,  Arch,  des  Missions  scientiiiques,  I.  112  and  pi.  3, 
quoted  Comptes  Rendus  of  the  French  Academy,  1899,  716.  H.  Rawlin- 
son  recognized  the  figure  as  that  of  the  founder  of  Khorsabad  and  took 
a  squeeze,  Athenaeum,  1850,  No.  1166.  Lepsius  noted  the  mention  of 
Bittaeans  in  Menander,  J.  Bonomi,  Nineveh  and  its  Palaces,^  1857,  144 
ff.  Cf.  also  I.  H.  Hall,  Proceedings  of  N.  Y.  University  Convocation, 
1876,  107,  and  L.  P.  di  Cesnola,  Cyprus,  1878,  47,  for  further  details 
of  the  discovery.  Published  III.  R.  11  and  more  fully,  Schrader, 
Abhandlungen  of  Berlin  Academy,  1881  and  separately,  Die  Sargonstele, 
1882;  by  Winckler,  op.  cit.,  II.  pi.  46  /.  Translations  by  G.  Smith, 
Zeitschr.  f.  Aegypt.  Sprache,  1871,  68;  Menant,  Annates,  206  ff.; 
Schrader,  op.  cit.;  Winckler,  op.  cit.,  I.  174  ff.  The  date  is  year  III 
of  Sargon,  King  of  Babylon  =  year  XV  as  king  of  Assyria  =  707.  The 
affinity  is  rather  with  the  large  than  with  the  small  inscriptions.  Quoted 
as  S.  In  I.  51  ff.  it  adds  a  fair  amount  of  new  information  about  Hamath. 
In  I.  46  ff.  the  battle  with  Rusash  is  placed  after  the  capture  of 
Mugagir,  which  is  perhaps  correct. 

"  The  greater  number  of  the  fragments  of  Prisms  A.  and  B,  have  been 
published  by  Winckler,  Sargon,  II.  pi.  43  ff.      There  is  no  doubt  as  to 


12  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

Another  group  is  that  containing  the  more  strictly  chron- 

the  order  of  the  fragments  of  Prism  A.,  for  they  actually  join.  Of  the 
three  legible  sections,  one,  that  relating  to  the  Medes,  has  been  trans- 
lated by  G.  Smith,  Assyrian  Discoveries,'^  1876,  288  f.  and  by  Winckler, 
Untersuchungen  zur  Altorientalischen  Geschichte,  1889,  118  if.;  another, 
relating  to  the  Ashdod  expedition,  by  G.  Smith,  op.  cit.,  289  ff.  and  by 
Winckler,  Sargon,  187  ff.;  the  third,  relating  to  Dalta  is  still  untrans- 
lated but  may  be  used.      The  fragments  are  K.  1668  b  -|-  DT.  b. 

Prism  B.  is  almost  identical  with  Prism  A,  in  size  and  character  of 
writing.  The  fragments  are  K.  1668  a  +  1671,  1668,  1672,  1673,  8536 
(the  unnumerirt  of  Winckler's  plate)  S.  2021,  2022,  2050,  79-7-8,  14. 
K.  4818  which  is  also  given  by  Winckler  clearly  does  not  belong  here 
and  may  be  excluded.  K.  1668a  has  already  been  joined  to  1671  and 
a  beautifully  clear  though  minute  photograph  of  these  is  given  by  C.  J. 
Ball,  Light  from  the  East,  1889,  185.  The  other  fragments  are  still 
unjoined  and  practically  undeciphered.  Bezold,  Zeitchr.  f.  Assyr.,  1889, 
411,  n.*  has  pointed  out  that  S.  2049,  Rm.  292,  and  82-5-22,  8  belong 
to  the  same  prism  but  they  are  still  unpublished. 

The  first  necessity  is  decipherment.  When  enough  has  been  made  out 
to  assign  each  fragment  its  subject,  an  attempt  at  arrangement  may  be 
made.  As  a  result  of  my  attempts,  I  believe  that  I  have  secured  large 
parts  of  four  columns  from  the  eight  originally  existing.  The  follow- 
ing is  my  arrangement: 

I  begin  my  first  column,  which  really  must  have  been  preceded  by 
one  or  more  columns  giving  titles,  introduction,  and  the  earliest  events 
of  the  reign,  with  Col.  I  of  K.  1672  where  we  have  references  to 
Samalla  and  Hamath.  Winckler,  who  has  studied  this  fragment, 
Altorientalische  Forschungen,  II.  71  ff.,  thinks  that  this  belongs  probably 
to  711,  but  long  before  I  had  any  hope  of  piecing  the  prism  together,  it 
had  seemed  to  me  that  the  whole  general  tenor  allowed  only  720,  or  year 
II.  If  now  we  look  for  a  fragment  continuing  the  same  subject,  we  have 
it  in  Col.  I  of  79-7-8,  14,  Winckler,  Mitth.  Vorderasiat.  Gesellsch.,  1898, 
I,  53,  where  we  have  references  to  Mugri  and  to  Martu,  or  Syria,  refer- 
ences which  we  naturally  connect  with  the  intrigues  of  Sibu  of  Egypt. 
The  second  part  of  this  column  deals  with  Urartu  and  the  Mannai  which 
would  then  be  the  Rusash  troubles  which  began,  as  it  would  seem,  in  719 
or  year  III.  We  would  then  be  inclined  to  place  next  Col.  I  of  S.  2021, 
since  we  have  a  reference  to  Ursa  or  Rusash,  and  that  our  assigning  of 
this  Col.  I  to  year  III  is  not  far  wrong  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  Col.  II 
of  S.  2021  is  actually  dated  in  year  V,  so  that  the  upper  part  of  this 
column  must  be  year  IV.  These  first  columns  of  these  three  fragments  are 
all  that  we  can  assign  to  the  first  column  of  the  Prism.      Comparison 


THE  SOURCES  1 3 

ological  documents.     The  so-called  Eponym  Canon  gives 

with  the  other  columns  shows  that,  at  the  least,  thirty-five  lines  from 
the  lower  part  of  the  column  have  been  lost.  For  Col.  II  of  the  Prism, 
we  have,  if  our  arrangement  of  Col.  I  is  correct.  Col.  II  of  K.  1672,  of 
79-7-8,  14,  and  of  S.  2021.  Unfortunately,  the  first  two  are  too  mutil- 
ated to  discover  what  country  they  belong  to,  and  the  same  is  true  of 
the  part  in  S.  2021  above  the  line.  Below  that,  we  have  a  new  year, 
year  V,  when  an  expedition  was  made  against  Ashur  liu.  In  conse- 
quence, all  above  the  line  must  be  year  IV,  or  earlier.  But  more  curious 
is  the  fact  that  the  Ashur  liu  expedition  is  in  year  V,  not  year  VI, 
as  in  the  Annals.  By  this  time,  the  Prism  has  fallen  one  year  behind 
the  Annals,  and  this  peculiarity  we  shall  find  to  the  end.  We  naturally 
expect  something  else  in  this  same  year  VI  of  the  Annals  =  year  V 
of  the  Prism,  and  we  find  it  in  K.  1669,  with  its  references  to  Kishesim 
whose  name  was  changed  to  Kar  Adar,  to  the  Madai,  and  to  Kimirra. 
To  be  sure,  the  last  place  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Annals  until  year 
VII,  but  the  general  locality  is  the  same.  Below  the  line  and  there- 
fore in  year  VI  is  a  section  I  cannot  identify.  But  to  this  same  year 
VI  must  be  referred  K.  8536,  since  the  references  to  Ursa  and  Que 
agree  well  enough  with  the  Que  of  Annals  year  VII.  This  ends  Col. 
II  of  the  Prism  which  must  have  had  at  least  seventy-five  lines.  For 
the  first  part  of  Col.  Ill  of  the  Prism,  we  have  A.,  B.,  C,  of  Winckler's 
arrangement  of  K.  1671 ;+  1668.  What  A.  deals  with  is  not  clear.  B. 
and  C.  relate  to  Haldia  and  Ursa,  that  is,  to  the  events  of  year  VIII 
of  the  Annals.  Making  the  correction  of  one  year,  our  year  VII  fits 
in  well.  After  this,  we  should  probably  place  Col.  I  of  S.  2022  where  a 
joint  may  perhaps  be  made.  Here  a  land  whose  name  begins  with  I. 
may  perhaps  be  in  the  Mannai  region.  This  must  be  in  the  year  VIII, 
for  on  Col.  II  of  this  fragment  we  have  j'ear  IX.  This  ends  Col.  Ill 
of  the  Prism.  At  the  beginning  of  Col.  IV  we  place,  though  doubtfully, 
K.  1673  with  its  mention  of  Aragi,  perhaps  Median.  At  any  rate,  we 
can  hardly  deny  to  this  D.,  E.,  F.,  of  K.  1671  ;-}-  1668.  We  should 
naturally  expect  here  events  of  year  VIII  or  year  IX  of  the  Annals, 
and  this  we  certainly  have.  D.  and  E.  deal  with  Amitashshi  of  Karalla 
and  with  Itti  of  Allabria,  and  then  below  the  line,  with  Dalta  of  Elli. 
So  far  all  is  well,  and  we  must  place  this  in  the  year  VIII  (IX).  When 
we  come  to  add  to  this  column  Col.  II  of  S.  2022,  we  find  ourselves  in 
trouble ;  for  the  first  half  of  this  is  given  to  Mita  and  Ambaris  who 
are  placed  in  year  X  in  the  Annals,  yet,  below  the  line,  we  have  year 
IX  for  the  Ashbod  expedition  which  is  year  XI  according  to  the  An- 
nals. In  these  last  cases,  then,  we  have  slipped  back  two  years  beyond 
the  Annals  dates.      What  does  this  mean?      Does  this  mean  that  some 


14 


WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 


US  the  list  of  eponyms  or  limmu,*^  and  this  bare  Hst  of  names 
now  begins  to  be  amplified  by  the  dated  commercial  docu- 
ments.^* More  important  are  two  fragments  which  add  to 
the  name  and  office  of  the  eponym  some  sort  of  a  historical 

years  were  spent  "  in  the  land  "  with  no  military  expeditions,  as  the 
Chronicle  Fragment  Rm.  2,  97  seems  to  indicate,  and  were  the  events 
which  actually  happened  extended  to  fill  up  the  blank  years  ?  At  any 
rate,  we  know  how  untrustworthy  the  official  chronology  is.  This  ends 
the  fourth  column  and  assigns  a  place  to  all  the  published  fragments. 
As  the  prism  was  eight-sided,  four  are  still  missing.  One  of  these  would 
be  taken  up  with  the  introduction.  Then  would  probably  come  our 
four.  The  last  three  columns  would  be  taken  up  with  the  events  after 
the  Ashdod  expedition.  This,  even  with  accounts  of  building  opera- 
tions, would  probably  end  the  prism  about  the  time  of  the  fall  of 
Babylon.  We  can  hardly  place  their  date  much  later  than  709,  for  the 
whole  group  of  official  inscriptions  from  707-706  are  closely  connected 
in  style,  etc.,  while  they  are  as  sharply  differentiated  from  the  Prisms. 
As  these  fragments  are  in  the  Kuyunjik  collection,  it  is  to  be  presumed 
that  they  came  from  Nineveh.  If  so,  they  probably  date  from  the  time 
before  Sargon  had  moved  into  Dur  Sharrukin.  Note  that  the  deed  of 
gift  of  714  is  given  at  Nineveh.  To  make  clear  my  plan  of  arrangement, 
I  subjoin  the  following  synopsis : 


Col.  I. 


II. 


Col.  III. 


Col. 
K.  1672. 
Hamath  (II)     X  (IV) 
79-7-^,  14- 
Martu  (II) 
Urartu  (III)     X  (IV) 

S.  2021. 
Urartu  (III)     X  (IV) 

Karalla  (V) 
I'  K.  1669 

Kishesim   (V) 
X  (VI) 

K.  8536. 
Que  (VI) 
*'  Published  III.  R.   i  ;  better  in  F.  Delitzsch,  Assyriche  Lesestiicke,' 
1878,  87  ff. 

**  A  complete  list  of  the   eponym   dates  with  the  authorities  may  be 
seen  in  C.  H.  W.  Johns,  Assyrian  Deeds  and  Documents^  1898,  I.  562  ff. 


K. 

X  (VII) 
Urartu  (VII) 
Urartu  (VII) 


Urartu?   (VII) 


Col.  IV. 
K.  1673. 

Aragi  (VIII) 
1671  +  1668. 

Karalla  (VIII) 

Karalla  (VIII) 

Elli   (VIII) 

Allabria  (VIII) 
5".  2022. 

Bit  Buritash  (VIII) 

Ashdod  (IX) 


THE   SOURCES  I  5 

Statement.  One  belongs  to  the  so-called  Assyrian  Chronicle 
and  covers  practically  the  whole  reign.  The  chronological 
clue  has  now  fortunately  been  discovered,  and  it  can  now  be 
utilized.  The  date  is  entirely  a  matter  of  conjecture,  and 
its  sources  cannot  be  found  in  any  inscriptions  known  to  us. 
Its  tendencies  seem  to  be  priestly,  but  its  chronology  agrees 
fairly  well  with  Prism  B,  and  it  seems  quite  reliable.*^    The 

"  The  fragment  of  an  "  Assyrian  Chronicle,"  Rm.  2,  97,  was  published 
by  C.  Bezold,  Proc.  Soc.  Bibl.  Arch.,  1889,  287  and  pi.  Ill  a.  Sayce 
utilized  it  in  Records  of  the  Pastf  II.  126  /.  He  omitted  1.  1-4  and  in 
several  cases  made  two  lines  refer  to  one  year.  To  him,  our  fragment 
was  only  a  variant  of  II.  R.  69,  which  however  is  a  chronicle  of  a  sort 
unique  as  yet.  Winckler  translated  and  transliterated  it  in  Keilinschr. 
Bibl.,  III.  2.  144  ff.  In  general,  this  is  more  accurate,  but  strangely 
enough  he  has  omitted  1.  4  which  throws  out  of  gear  his  whole  later 
chronology.  Barta,  in  Harper,  Assyr.  Bab.  Literature,  215,  has  also 
given  a  translation  with  1.  4  in  its  proper  place. 

The  first  error  made  by  all  these  is  in  not  seeing  what  Bezold  had 
already  pointed  out,  the  fact  that  it  belongs  to  the  type  of  the  real 
Assyrian  Chronicle,  and  that  therefore  one  line  and  no  more  must  be 
assigned  to  each  year.  Bearing  this  in  mind,  we  may  utilize  the  clue 
given  by  Sayce  when  he  takes  the  ri  of  1.  15  to  be  the  end  of  Kirruri. 
In  1.  14-18,  we  have  to  the  left  of  the  text  a  vertical  line  and  to  the 
left  of  this,  on  each  of  the  five  lines,  a  single  character.  If  this  frag- 
ment really  belongs  to  the  Assyrian  Chronicle  class,  then  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  this  first  column  contained  the  eponym  for  the  year  together 
with  the  place  he  was  governor  of.  In  707,  as  II.  R.  69  shows,  Sha  Ashur 
dubbu  of  the  city  of  Tush-ha-an  was  eponym.  Here  then  belongs  the 
an  of  1.  16.  In  1.  15,  the  ri  is  clearly  the  last  part  of  Kirruri  of  which 
Shamash  upahhir  was  eponym  and  in  708.  In  710,  Mannuki  Ashur 
li'u  was  eponym  of  Tile.  As  we  might  expect,  the  a  of  this  line  is  only 
the  last  half  of  the  e.  For  706,  we  have>  Mutakkil  Ashur  of  Guzana. 
Here  Bezold  reads  tu  which  is  probably  a  misreading  of  za-na,  one 
stroke  of  the  za  being  lost  and  the  na  having  the  form  common  in  the 
letters.  For  705,  Upahhir  Bel  of  Amedi,  the  ur  is  probably  a  mis- 
reading for  di.  This  order  of  eponyms,  Tile,  Kirruri,  Tushhan,  Guzana, 
Amedi,  is  to  be  found  in  the  Chronicle  under  766-762  and  730-726,  and 
for  the  last  three  in  II.  R.  69.  Let  us  now  go  through  our  fragment 
year  by  year  to  see  if  this  scheme  will  work  out.  In  1.  i,  kar'lru  should 
be  read.      Karru  is   an   obscure  word ;   whether  it  means   a  destroying 


1 6  WESTERN   ASIA   IN   THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

Other  is  not  very  different  from  this  type,  but  its  exact 
parallel  is  still  to  be  found.  Each  year  from  708  to  704 
has  several  lines  devoted  to  historical  data.     It  has  close 

preparatory  to  rebuilding  or  actually  the  rebuilding  itself,  is  still  uncer- 
tain. It  already  occurs  in  the  Chronicle  under  788.  The  year  here 
would  be  722.  In  721,  1.  2,  Winckler  restores  e'\tarab.  Read  ilu  X  ana 
beti  eshshi  eltarab,  "the  god  X  entered  a  new  house,"  cf.  the  Chronicle 
under  787.  722-21  therefore  correspond  to  788-87.  L.  3,  720  is  ba-la. 
What  this  may  mean  has  thus  far  baffled  me.  For  1.  4,  719,  read 
ushshu  sha  bit  Nerlgal  karru,  "  the  foundations  of  the  house  of  Nergal 
were  rebuilt,"  cf.  the  Chronicle  under  789  according  to  Delitzsch,  Beitr. 
Assyr.,  I.  616.  This  was  probably  the  Nergal  temple  at  Kutha,  for 
there  is  no  account  later  of  its  capture  by  Sargon.  L.  5,  718,  is  not 
to  be  read  Iramlu  Mannai,  "  Iranzu  of  the  Mannai,"  for  the  name  of 
an  enemy  never  occurs  in  the  Chronicle.  The  half  destroyed  sign  before 
Mannu  is  rather  with  Sayce  to  be  taken  as  alu,  "  city,"  though  I  confess 
I  know  only  matu  and  amelu  used  before  it.  The  events  here  referred 
to  are  given  in  A.  under  716.  L.  6,  717,  is  pehuti  shaknu,  "governors 
appointed,"  and  refers  either  to  a  settlement  consequent  upon  the  fall  of 
Carchemish  or  to  the  Mannai  troubles.  L.  7,  716,  reads  f-di  (alu) 
Mugagir  Haldia.  The  first  sign  can  hardly  be  a.  Haldia  has  no  deter- 
minative, and  whether  god  or  people  is  not  evident.  The  next  line,  715, 
has  rabute,  "  the  nobles,"  followed  by  ina  {matu)  Ellipa,  "  into  the  land 
of  Elli,"  a  reference  to  the  events  of  A.  83  if.  L.  9,  714,  should  be 
read  {ilu)  X  ana  bet'\i  eshshi  etarab,  "  the  god  X  entered  a  new  house," 
the  complement  to  1.  4  as  1.  2  is  to  1.  i.  L.  10,  713,  ana^  {alu) 
Mugagir,  is  the  expedition  not  mentioned  in  the  Annals,  cf.  Belck  and 
Lehmann,  Zeitschr.  f.  EthnoL,  1899,  102,  and  the  chapter  on  the  Armen- 
ian wars.  For  712,  we  read  ina  mati,  "  in  the  land."  This  is  inter- 
esting, as  the  Annals  has  expeditions  for  each  year.  For  711,  we  have 
ana  {alu)  Markasa,  which  agrees  with  the  facts  known  from  other 
sources  for  that  year.  Under  710,  ana  Bit  Zirna'id,  sharru  ina  Kesh 
bedi,  "  to  Bit  Zirna'id,  the  king  was  distant  in  Kesh,"  if,  with  Muss 
Arnolt,  we  take  bedi  from  a  root  well  known  to  every  traveller  in  Syria, 
must  of  course  refer  to  the  campaign  against  Babylon  in  that  year,  while 
the  next  line,  Sharrukin  qata  Beli  iggabat,  "  Sargon  seized  the  hands  of 
Bel,"  as  clearly  refers  to  what  took  place  at  the  beginning  of  709. 
{Alu)  Kumuha  kashid,  {amelu)  pehu  shakin,  "  Qummuh  captured,  a 
governor  established  "  must  be  placed  under  708.  The  first  part  refers 
to  events  properly  dated  in  the  Annals.  Whether  the  second  part  refers 
to  the  same  or  to  Babylonia  is  uncertain.     The  second  is  more  probable. 


THE   SOURCES  1/ 

affinities  with  the  Babylonian  Chronicle,  but  seems  in  at 
least  one  case  not  to  have  so  well  repeated  its  tradition.  It 
has  no  relationship  with  the  first  fragment.  Though  prob- 
ably late,  it  used  good  sources  and  seems  trustworthy .*« 

The  fourth  group  consists  of  the  early  inscriptions.  The 
Nimrud  inscription  comes  from  Kalhu,  the  early  capital  of 
Sargon.  Its  date  is  about  716.  Unfortunately  it  is  brief, 
and  is  not  in  chronological  order.  Some  new  facts  are  to 
be  gleaned,  such  as  the  conquest  of  laudu  and  the  capture 
of  Carchemish.*^    A  brief  fragment  from  year  six  has  little 

Under  707,  sharru  ishtu  Babili  issuhra,  we  have  the  return  from  Babylon 
at  the  end  of  that  year  on  the  news  of  the  Cimmerian  invasion,  for 
which  see  chapter  VIII.  The  next  two  years  refer  to  Dur  lakin,  but 
just  what  they  indicate  is  obscure.  The  first,  706,  reads,  sha  (alu) 
Dur  lakin  naga,  "  he  of  Dur  lakin  went  out,"  the  other,  705,  (a/w)  Dur 
lakin  nahil,  "  Dlir  lakin  was  destroyed."  Under  704,  we  have  ana 
bitatishunu  etarbu,  which  we  must  take,  with  Winckler,  "  the  gods  of 
Shumer  and  Akkad]  to  their  houses  returned."  For  703,  rabut']e  ina 
Karalli  "  the  nobles  into  Karalla."  This  seems  to  refer  to  Sennacherib, 
Prism,  I.  63-II.  7,  in  his  second  expedition,  for  the  conquered  tribes 
are  annexed  to  the  province  of  Arapha.  The  last  line,  under  702,  is 
mahra,  "  former."      What  it  refers  to  I  do  not  know. 

While  this  fragment  clearly  belongs  to  the  same  class  as  the  Assyrian 
Chronicle,  it  does  not  seem  to  be  related  to  any  of  the  known  documents 
dealing  with  Sargon's  reign.  It  therefore  has  the  value  of  an  inde- 
pendent witness.  Its  chronology  seems  to  agree  with  that  of  Prism  B. 
where  the  two  touch,  and  on  the  basis  of  these  two  I  have  built  my 
chronological  scheme.  The  large  part  devoted  to  religious  buildings 
seems  to  indicate  priestly  leaning,  if  not  priestly  authorship.  The  au- 
thor seems  to  have  been  an  Assyrian,  not  a  Babylonian,  nevertheless.  As 
to  his  date,  we  only  know  that  the  fragment  closes  at  702. 

**  II.  R.  69  d  =  K.  4446.  A  good  translation  in  Schrader,  Keilinschr. 
Bibl.,  I.  215.  Several  changes  have  been  made  by  the  author.  For 
these,  see  the  pertinent  sections  of  the  text. 

^"^  Published  by  A.  H.  Layard,  Inscriptions  in  the  Cuneiform  Character, 
1 85 1,  pi.  33  f.;  Winckler,  Sargon,H.^\.  /^'&,'D.  G.  Lyon,  Assyrian  Manual, 
1884,  gfF.  Translated  by  Winckler,  Sargon,  I.  169  if.',  Peiser,  Keilinschr. 
Bibl.,  II.  34  fF.  Quoted  as  N.  The  large  part  in  it  played  by  Pisiris 
of  Gargamish  shows  that  its  date  must  be  placed  soon  after  his  capture. 


1 8  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

value,*^  but  the  one  from  year  two  (720)  is  extremely  im- 
portant not  only  for  its  chronology  but  for  the  vivid  light  it 
casts  on  the  causes  of  Sargon's  accession.*®  A  few  other 
fragments  are  known  but  are  either  unpublished  or  of  little 
importance.^^  No  affinities  have  been  found  within  this 
group. 

We  may  conclude  our  survey  of  the  official  material  by 
mentioning  the  labels  on  the  sculptures,  the  bricks,  the 
inscribed  fragments  of  pottery  and  of  glass,  and  the  minor 
building  inscriptions.^^  In  some  periods,  all  this  would  have 
great  value,  but  so  full  are  our  sources  that  we  rarely  need 
their  help,  though  the  building  inscriptions  add  to  the  culture 
history  and  the  labels  enable  us  to  utilize  the  beautiful  bas- 
reliefs  which  have  a  real  historic  value. 

Such,  then,  are  the  official  documents  the  king  of  Assyria 
wished  to  hand  down  to  posterity.  Edited  though  they  are,  a 
careful  study  may  often  secure  the  truth.  Yet  were  we 
confined  to  these  alone,  our  knowledge  would  be  very  one- 
sided, as  indeed  it  is  even  now.    Fortunately,  we  have  other 

E.  Schrader,  Die  Sargonstele,  1882,  8n.\  makes  the  Karalla  expedition 
(716)  the  limiting  datum.  But  A.  78  under  715  corresponds  with  N. 
9  where  the  restoring  of  disordered  Man  is  mentioned.  Still,  much  of 
this  Man  section  may  be  placed  earlier,  so  the  question  is  still  unsettled. 

*'K.   i66o,  published  Winckler,  Sammlung,  II.  4. 

"K.  1349,  published  Winckler,  Sammlung,  II,  1893,  i,  translated 
Forsch.,  I.  401   fF. 

*^K.  221  -j-  2669;  K.  3149  with  references  to  Urartu;  K.  3150,  refer- 
ences to  Harran;  K.  4455,  mention  of  ...  shum  ishkum  son  of 
Ninib  .  .  . ;  and  to  Urartu ;  K.  4463  published  Winckler,  Sammlung,  II. 
6;  K.  4471,  references  to  Urartu,  Nar  Marrati,  Kaldu,  published 
Winckler,  Sammlung,  II.  4;  D.  T.  310;  83-1-18,  215,  references  to 
Labdudi,  Hanban,  Sirra,  Amana.  The  unpublished  fragments  are  known 
from  C.  Bezold,  Catalogue  of  the  Cuneiform  Tablets  in  the  Kouyunjik 
Collection,  1889  ff. 

"  Grouped  together  by  Winckler  as  Kleine  Inschriften,  Sargon,  II.  pi. 
49  and  I.  190  if.  Further  bibliography  may  be  found  under  the  second 
reference. 


THE    SOURCES  I  9 

data.  For  we  have,  almost  in  its  entirety,  the  contents  of 
the  Nineveh  archive  chambers,  and  much  of  the  material 
goes  back  to  the  days  of  Sargon.  Of  the  documents  there 
found,  the  most  important  are  the  letters  and  reports.  Many 
are  from  commanders  in  the  field  and  throw  a  new  light  on 
the  strategy  of  the  times,  on  the  foreign  relations,  and  even 
on  the  culture  life  of  the  neighboring  peoples.  Others  deal 
with  domestic  affairs,  reports,  favorable  or  unfavorable 
omens,  state  the  health  of  the  royal  family,  or  merely  pay 
their  respects  to  their  lord.  Valuable  as  these  are,  it  is  not  easy 
to  localize  them.  Dates  are  rare ;  the  same  name  may  belong  to 
more  than  one  person ;  a  connection  with  known  events  is 
difficult  to  find.  To  make  matters  worse,  they  have  been 
until  recently  sadly  neglected,  and  in  consequence  are  still 
hardly  out  of  the  decipherment  stage.  A  large  number  have 
been  given  in  the  collection  of  Harper,^^  but  others  which 
seem  from  the  catalogue  to  belong  to  our  period  are  still 
unpublished.  Of  those  published,  a  minority  have  been 
really  studied.  One  group,  those  dealing  with  the  events 
of  the  last  few  years  on  the  northern  frontier,  have  been 
already   isolated    and    a    fairly    complete    account   can    be 

"  The  great  corpus  of  Assyrian  letters  is  being  made  by  R.  F,  Harper, 
Assyrian  and  Babylonian  Letters,  1892  if.  Reference  will  be  made  to 
other  publications,  translations,  etc.,  as  each  letter  is  cited.  The  col- 
lection is  quoted  as  H.  When  I  began  this  work,  I  had  the  impression, 
which  is  perhaps  still  somewhat  current,  that  the  number  of  letters  to 
be  assigned  to  this  reign  was  small  and  I  hoped  to  be  able  to  work  them 
all  out,  taking  the  letters  already  studied  as  a  basis.  It  was  not  long 
before  I  recognized  the  difficulty  and  soon  the  impossibility  of  my 
task.  I  have  of  course  utilized  all  those  which  have  been  translated  or 
transliterated  and  a  partial  quotation  or  even  bare  reference  has  in- 
duced me  to  attempt  letters  thus  far  unstudied.  In  addition,  I  have 
stumbled  upon  certain  others  which  have  seemed  worth  further  study. 
In  too  many  cases,  this  has  shown  that  the  events  referred  to  did  not 
belong  to  the  reign  or  could  not  be  definitely  located.  Often  an  one  line 
reference  has  meant  hours  of  work.      No  doubt  I  have  made  mistakes. 


20  WESTERN   ASIA   IN    THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

gained  from  these  alone.^^  Here  and  there  a  reference  may 
be  made  to  a  letter,  but  full  study  from  the  historical  stand- 
point must  be  preceded  by  full  study  by  the  philologist. 
Yet,  little  as  they  have  yet  been  used,  their  use  has  materially 
changed  our  account  in  places. 

These  letters  were  not  the  only  documents  preserved  in 
the  Nineveh  archives,  for  in  them  were  preserved  all  sorts 
of  written  material  after  that  peculiarly  oriental  fashion 
which  knows  no  distinction  between  public  and  private, 
when  the  ruler  is  concerned.  Even  the  literary  texts,  mostly 
philological  or  religious  in  character,  which  formed  the  so- 
called  library,  seem  really  to  have  been  a  part  of  this  general 
collection.  Of  purely  private  documents  there  was  no  lack. 
Every  business  transaction,  no  matter  how  simple,  must  have 
its  written  voucher.  Through  these,  the  whole  political, 
religious,  social,  and  economic  life  of  the  people  is  laid  bare 
before  us.  To  what  an  extent  this  collection  of  data  can  be 
utilized  for  our  period,  the  chapter  on  the  culture  history 
will  show.^* 

Thus  far  we  have  been  discussing  only  the  sources  which 
give  us  the  Assyrian  point  of  view.  We  are  fortunate  in 
having  records,  few  as  they  are,  from  the  surrounding 
nations.  Babylonia,  Haldia,  Judaea,  and  by  these  we  can 
check  the  ones  already  noted. 

Merodach  Baladan,  in  spite  of  his  long  reign,  prepared 
no  war  annals  or,  if  he  did,  they  have  not  come  down  to  us. 

A  score  is  considered  enough  for  a  philologist  to  study  for  a  doctoral 
thesis,  if  it  is  to  be  done  well.  I  have  worked  through  some  two  hun- 
dred. A  further  difficulty  is  the  fact  that  mutilated  letters,  though  often 
of  great  value,  are  generally  neglected.  When  a  larger  number  is  made 
more  accessible,  I  hope  to  return  to  the  historical  phases  of  the  study. 

'^  Cf.  chap.  VIII.  n.  5. 

"The  great  collection  of  C.  H.  Johns,  Assyrian  Deeds  and  Docu- 
ments^ has  superseded,  so  far  as  our  period  is  concerned,  all  preceding 
publications.      Quoted  as  J. 


THE   SOURCES  21 

The  only  historical  document  we  have  is  the  Babylonian 
Chronicle.^'^  This  is  a  fine  piece  of  work.  The  author  is 
indeed  a  patriotic  Babylonian.  But  he  seems  to  have  no 
more  bias  in  favor  of  the  Chaldaean  Merodach  Baladan  than 
he  has  for  the  Assyrian  Sargon.  In  his  opinion,  no  doubt, 
one  was  as  much  a  foreigner  and  a  barbarian  as  the  other. 
This  impartiality  seems  to  be  proved  where  we  can  test  it. 
The  date  is  late,  perhaps  in  the  Persian  period,  but  he  clearly 
used  good  sources. 

Equally  valuable  is  the  boundary  stone^^  which  gives  the 
text  of  a  charter  by  which  Merodach  Baladan  granted  a  plot 
of  ground  to  one  of  his  favorites.  In  it  he  gives  an  expo- 
sition of  his  land  policy.  If  he  says  that  he  honored  the 
gods,  we  can  hardly  cite  Sargon  to  the  contrary,  nor,  if  we 
accept  Sargon's  testimony  to  the  oppression  of  a  pro-Assy- 
rian party  by  his  Chaldaean  rival,  must  we  forget  that  the 
latter  makes  exactly  the  same  charges  against  the  party 
which  held  Babylonia  before  his  arrival  ?  Aside  from  these, 
we  have  only  a  few  commercial  documents  of  the  usual  sort. 
There  are  other  sources  which,  though  now  in  Greek  dress, 
actually  seem  to  go  back  to  cuneiform  originals.  Berossus 
has  a  very  uncertain  reference  to  Merodach  Baladan  ;^^ 
there  are  references  to  that  ruler  and  to  a  siege  of  Tyre 
which  may  possibly  be  attributed  to  Sargon  f^  while  Ptolemy, 
in  his  Almagest,  furnishes  us  with  a  list  of  Babylonian  kings 

"Best  published  in  F.  Delitzsch,  Assyrische  Lesestiicke*  1900,  137  ff. 
A  good  translation  by  A.  Barta,  Assyr.  Babyl.  Lit.,  200  ff. 

^  Published  by  F.  Delitzsch,  Beitr.  zur  Assyr.,  II.  258  if.  Translated 
by  Delitzsch,  /.  c;  Peiser  and  Winckler,  Keilinschr.  Bihl,  III.  185  if.; 
R.  F.  Harper,  Assyr.  Bah.  Lit.,  64  ff.  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  232  would 
place  this  much  earlier  since  archaic  metrology  is  used,  but  this  hardly 
will  stand  in  the  face  of  the  way  the  data  fit  into  our  general  situation. 

"Berossus,  Fragment  13=  Jos.  Ant.  X.  2.  2. 

***  Eusebius,  Chron.,  ed.  Schone,  I.  27,  35.      But  see  chap.  IV.  n.  62. 


22  WESTERN    ASIA   IN    THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

and  further  strengthens  the  chronology  by  the  mention  of 
three  ecHpses.^^ 

The  other  inscriptional  sources  are  few.  The  Haldian 
ones,  so  numerous  at  an  earlier  time,  are  now  but  a  bare 
half  dozen  in  number.  We  have  building  inscriptions  of 
Rusash^^  and  Argishtish  IP^  as  well  as  the  Rusash  in- 
scription at  Lake  Gokcha^^  to  show  the  extent  of  the  empire. 
Of  real  importance  is  the  Topsana  stele,^^  which  sheds  so 
much  light  on  the  truthfulness  of  Sargon's  scribes.  As  for 
the  Hittite  inscriptions,  we  may  still  doubt  if  they  have  been 
really  deciphered,  and  even  if  they  have,  the  actual  gain  is 
small,  while  the  knowledge  that  our  Itamara  the  Sabaean 
may  be  one  of  the  Yatha'amars  of  the  Sabaean  inscriptions, 
is  no  great  advance.^* 

Owing  to  their  inclusion  as  a  part  of  our  sacred  literature, 
the  study  of  the  Hebrew  documents  is  one  of  peculiar  diffi- 
culty. Those  who  hold  the  older  and  more  conservative 
views  have  ascribed  large  portions  of  the  book  of  Isaiah  to 
this  reign,  while  more  radical  critics  have  done  likewise  with 
those  sections  they  still  allow  to  that  prophet.     Be  it  as  it 

""  Ptolemy,  Almagest,  IV.  5- 

®°  The  Rusahina  building  inscription  of  Keshish  G611,  published  with 
an  elaborate  study  of  the  work  and  of  its  remains,  W.  Belck,  Zeitschr. 
f.  Ethnologie,  1892,  151  f.,  cf.  141  ff.;  Sayce,  Journal  of  Royal  Asiatic 
Society,  1893,  18,  No,  LXXIX.  Lehmann,  No.  127  in  Sitzungsherichte 
of  Berlin  Academy,  1900,  624.  The  Teishbash  inscription  of  Van,  pub- 
lished in  transliteration  by  Lehmann,  /.  c,  No.  126. 

*^  The  Arjish  inscriptions  describing  the  building  of  reservoirs  for  the 
Argishtish  city,  Lehmann,  /,  c,  No.  130,  131. 

*^  The  rock  inscription  at  Aluchalu  on  the  south  shore  of  the  Gokcha 
Sea,  Sayce,  op.  cit.,  1894,  713  if.,  No.  LV.  The  conquest  of  kings  of 
twenty-three  lands  and  the  carrying  of  the  people  to  Van  is  boasted 
of.     At  this  spot,  a  Teishbash  temple  was  erected. 

°' Discussed  by  Lehmann,  Zeitschr.  f.  EthnoL,  1899,  99  ff.)  cf.  also 
Lehmann,  Sitsungsherichte ,  I.  c.  No.   128. 

•*  See  more  fully  under  the  study  of  Arabian  affairs. 


THE    SOURCES  23 

may  in  regard  to  the  Isaianic  character  of  these  oracles, 
repeated  readings  with  this  end  in  view  have  left  me  unable 
to  locate  with  any  assurance  a  single  one  in  Sargon's  reign. 

Although  the  heading  of  the  twentieth  chapter  of  Isaiah 
refers  to  the  Ashdod  expedition,  we  are  not  justified  in 
accordingly  attributing  the  oracle  itself  to  this  date,  as  will 
be  clear  to  any  student  of  prophetical  headings.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  heading  itself,  whatever  the  date  of  its  in- 
sertion, does  reveal  knowledge  of  the  actual  facts.  We 
have  here  an  excellent  illustration  of  the  fact  that  a  very 
late  insertion  may  nevertheless  go  back  to  a  good  early 
source. 

The  reference  in  the  tenth  chapter®^  to  the  capture  of 
Calno  and  Carchemish,  Hamath  and  Arpad,  Samaria  and 
Damascus,  clearly  belongs  to  our  reign.  But  the  Greek  read 
a  different  text,  and  it  may  perhaps  be  suspected  that  here, 
too,  we  have  a  later  form  based  on  early  information.  Of 
the  same  type  and  period  are  the  historical  references  in 
the  Assyrian  speeches  of  Kings.  Although  attributed  to 
Sennacherib,  they  really  fit  better  the  situation  in  the  time 
of  Sargon.^^ 

The  account  of  the  end  of  Samaria  in  its  two  parallel 
forms^^  belongs  at  least  in  part  to  this  reign.  The  basis  of 
this  seems  to  be  a  contemporary  or  nearly  contemporary  ac- 
count and,  brief  as  it  is,  seems  thoroughly  accurate.  As  I 
have  already  shown,^®  we  must  accept  its  most  important 
statement,  that  it  was  Shalmaneser  and  not  Sargon  who 
took  Samaria.  The  embassy  of  Merodach  Baladan  has 
always  been  a  troublesome  chronological  difficulty.^^     The 

«« II  Kings  20"  if ;  39^  ff. 

'=  Isaiah  10°. 

««II  Kings   18^;  I9l^ 

"II  Kings  i7'-«;  18*^" 

^  Amer.  Journal  of  Semitic  Languages,  1905,  179  if. 


24  WESTERN   ASIA   IN    THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

great  objection  to  placing  it  in  Sargon's  reign  is  the  fact 
that  the  current  chronology  would  not  permit  Hezekiah  to 
be  placed  so  far  back.  But  this  chronology  is  purely  arti- 
ficial and  can  hardly  count.  On  the  other  hand,  the  time 
Merodach  Baladan  had  under  Sennacherib  was  too  small 
and  his  position  too  precarious  to  seduce  Hezekiah,  whereas 
it  would  be  most  natural  for  that  prince  to  unite  with  the 
Chaldaean  who  had  just  won  the  battle  at  Dur  ilu  against 
the  Assyrian  who  had  already,  or  rather  his  predecessor, 
put  an  end  to  the  northern  kingdom  and  was  already  threat- 
ening his  own.  Perhaps,  too,  the  account  of  Hezekiah's 
Philistine  wars^®  may  be  connected  with  the  Ashdod  revolt 
in  711  rather  than  with  the  Ekron  troubles  of  701."^^ 

It  is  with  these  materials  that  we  must  reconstruct  the 
history  of  Western  Asia  in  the  time  of  Sargon.  As  must 
always  be  the  case  in  the  history  of  the  past,  there  are  many 
deplorable  gaps  which  we  would  gladly  have  filled.  Yet, 
when  we  consider  the  lapse  of  time,  we  must  admit  that 
there  is  a  remarkably  large  amount  of  material  with  which 
to  attempt  this  reconstruction.  For  the  space  of  time,  barely 
sixteen  years,  and  the  extent  of  country,  a  good  part  of 
Western  Asia,  we  may  challenge  comparison  with  many  a 
period  of  classical  or  even  mediaeval  history.  And  there 
are  few  periods  of  history,  ancient  or  mediaeval,  which 
furnish  so  fine  an  opportunity  for  the  exercise  of  the  his- 
torian's art  as  does  this  corner  of  the  "  sometime  realm  of 
archaeology." 

»»II  Kings  i8«. 

'^In  general,  it  may  be  said  that  there  is  little  contact  between  As- 
syria and  Judah  in  this  reign  and  I  have  therefore  reduced  discussion  of 
Biblical  questions  to  a  minimum.  It  is  only  fair  to  state  that  during  the 
present  year  an  elaborate  study  of  Kings  has  been  carried  on  in  the 
Semitic  Seminary  and  that  I  hope  later  to  publish  some  of  my  results. 


CHAPTER   II 

ACCESSION 

Sargon  the  Younger,  the  man  who  formed  the  central 
object  of  one  of  the  most  brilHant  periods  of  ancient  Ori- 
ental history,  might  well  boast  himself  a  self-made  man,  for 
in  spite  of  his  boasts  of  the  three  hundred  and  fifty  kings 
who  ruled  Assyria  before  him^  and  of  his  mention  of  the 
kings  his  fathers,^  it  is  certain  that  he  was  not  of  the  blood 
royal.  What  his  real  ancestry  was  we  do  not  know.  He 
himself  keeps  a  discreet  silence  on  the  subject.  His  son, 
Sennacherib,  secured  a  splendid  ancestry,  for  he  claimed 
descent  from  the  old  mythical  heroes,  Gilgamish,  Eabani, 
Humbaba,  and  the  like.^  This  was  evidently  felt  to  be  going 
too  far,  for  Esarhaddon  already  as  crown  prince*  gives  the 
more  modest  genealogy  which  became  standard.^  Accord- 
ing to  this,  Sargon  was  a  scion  of  the  old  half  mythical  house 
of  Bel  ibni,  son  of  Adasi.^ 

^  C.  45  ;  B.  43  ;  note  the  use  of  malki,  "  princes."  Cf.  also  the  use  of 
"  Kings  my  fathers  "  by  the  usurper  Tiglath  Pileser,  Annals  19. 

^C.  48. 

'Johns,  Deeds,  III.  413. 

*K.  13733  published  ly  Winckler,  Forsch.,  II.  23. 

'  Negub  Tunnel  Ins.,  5,  Scheil,  Recueil  de  Travaux^  1895,  82;  81-6-7, 
209,  G.  Barton,  Proc.  Amer.  Orient.  Soc,  1891,  CXXX ;  K.  2801 ,4- K. 
3053  +  D.  T.  252 ;  A.  H.  82-7-14  unnumbered.  These  have  been  quoted 
by  G.  Smith,  Zeitschr.  f.  Aegypt.  Sprache,  1869,  93  if.,  and  by  Winckler, 
Sargon,  XIII.  n.^  and  Hebraica,  IV.  52  f. 

"  In  the  early  days  of  Assyriological  study,  the  genealogy  was  accepted 
without  protest.  The  untrustworthy  character  has  been  recognized  by 
Winckler,  Hebraica,  I.  c,  and  others.  To  my  mind,  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  it  is  made  of  whole  cloth.  G.  Rawlinson,  Five  Ancient 
Monarchies,*  1879,   11.   145  points   out  that,   while   Nabunaid   frequently 

25 


26  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

As  we  do  not  know  his  family,  so  we  do  not  know  his 
real  name.  On  his  accession  he  assumed  that  of  Sharrukin, 
better  known  to  us,  from  its  Biblical  form,  as  Sargon.  The 
reason  for  this  is  clear.  ThrcS  thousand  years  before^ 
there  had  ruled  in  Agade  a  mighty  monarch,  Shargani  by 
name,  whose  power  and  wealth  were  still  evidenced  by  the 
inscriptions  in  the  temples  he  had  erected.  Originally  the 
name  seems  to  have  meant  "A  god  has  established  him  as 
king."  ^    A  later  age  had  forgotten  this  meaning,  and  it  had, 

mentions  his  father  though  but  a  noble,  Sargon  does  not,  and  suspects 

that  he  was  not  even  of  good  family.  To  this  we  can  hardly  say,  with 
Tiele,  Gesch.,  254,  that  Sennacherib  never  mentions  his  father,  for  he 
actually  does  so  in  K.  4730.  Possible  conjectures  are  those  of  F. 
Hommel,  Gesch.  Babyloniens  und  Assyriens,  1885,  679,  that  we  may  see 
his  father's  name  in  the  Habigal,  the  dynasty  name  of  the  Babylonian 
royal  lists,  of  Tiele,  op.  cit.,  256,  that  he  was  a  son  of  Ashur  nirari,  and 
of  G.  Maspero,  Passing  of  the  Empires,  1900,  221,  that  he  could  actually 
trace  royal  ancestors  on  the  distaff  side,  since  the  daughters  of  the 
king  no  doubt  married  into  the  noble  houses.  The  facts  do  not  agree 
with  the  suggestion  of  Hommel,  Gesch.,  680,  that  Babylonian  origin  is 
demanded  by  his  Babylonian  name.  That  he  was  born  before  745,  Tiele, 
op.  cit.,  2S6,  is  quite  probable,  but  it  is  extremely  unlikely  that  he  was 
seventy  years  old  when  he  became  king,  as  Oppert,  Studien  und  Kritiken, 
1871,  71 10,  Winckler,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  1887,  392,  may  be  right  in 
making  the  descent  from  an  old  King  of  Ashur  a  compliment  to  that  city. 

'  Of  course  the  date  of  Nabunaid  is  not  exact  and  may  be  a  century 
or  so  out  of  the  way.  But  I  believe  that  it  is  approximately  correct. 
That  there  is  a  gap  may  well  be  due  only  to  our  lack  of  material. 

'  Sargon  of  Agade  calls  himself  in  his  own  inscriptions  Shargani, 
e.  g.,  Keilinschr.  Bibl.,  III.  i.  100.  In  the  Assyrian  tablets,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  form  usual  with  his  namesake  is  given.  This  is  one 
of  the  signs  for  sharru,  "  king,"  plus  GI.NA  or  DU  =  ukin,  rarely  u-kin. 
For  a  few  selected  forms,  cf.  J.  N.  Strassmaier,  Alphabetisches  Verzeich- 
niss,  1886,  sub  voce.  A  person  named  Sharrukinu  occurs  in  Darius 
20-3-6,  Strassmaier,  /.  c.  The  name  occurs  as  Sargon  in  Isaiah  20^,  as 
Sargon  in  Symmachus,  and  as  Sargon  in  Aquila  and  Theodotion.  The 
Arna  of  the  Septuagint  seems  an  early  error,  aleady  in  the  time  of 
Jerome,  in  Isaiam,  ad  loc,  for  Arka  which  must  then  of  course  be  con- 
nected with  the  Arkeanos  of  the  Canon  of  Ptolemy  which  itself  is  but 


ACCESSION  27 

by  a  process  of  folk  etymology,  come  to  mean  "  The  estab- 
lished king."  ^  It  was  in  this  latter  sense  that  the  usurper 
assumed  it,  and  by  the  plays  upon  it  in  his  own  records 
showed  to  the  world  his  well-established  rule.^^ 

Shargani  thus  became  a  sort  of  patron  saint  to  his  name- 
sake. He  did  not,  it  is  true,  claim  descent  from  him.  But 
we  do  see  a  sort  of  a  Sargon  renaissance,  a  renewed  interest 
in  everything  touching  the  older  monarch.  For  instance, 
there  had  come  down  a  great  astronomical  treatise,  the 
"Illumination  of  Bel,"  which  was  ascribed  to  Shargani. 
This  was  introduced  into  Assyria  and  frequently  copied  in 
this  and  succeeding  reigns.    To  the  same  influence  must  no 

arku,  "  the  later,"  "  the  second."  This  last  expression  does  not  seem 
to  be  used  to  distinguish  him  from  Shargani  in  his  own  inscriptions,  but 
that  it  was  used  in  his  lifetime  is  proved  by  the  dated  documents  given 
in  III.  R.  2.  It  is  interesting,  in  this  connection,  to  notice  that  Ptolemy 
evidently  derived  his  information  about  Babylon  through  Egyptian 
sources,  as  the  names  of  the  months  show,  while  the  Septuagint  of  course 
was  made  under  Egyptian  influence.  Why  should  the  tradition  current 
in  Egypt  have  used  arku  instead  of  Sargon's  own  proper  name?  De- 
Saulcy,  quoted  Oppert,  Ins.  Assyr.,  2  first  identified  Arkeanos  with 
Sargon,  The  best  discussion  of  the  name  is  still  that  by  Schrader, 
Assyrisch-Babylonische  Keilinschriften,  1S72,  158  ff.  Peiser,  Mitth. 
Vorderas.  Gesellsch.,  1900,  2,  50,  explains  the  numerical  play  on  his 
name  in  C.  65  by  suggesting  that  his  full  name,  which,  as  it  stands,  is 
certainly  incomplete,  was  Ashur  shar  ukin.  For  the  various  specula- 
tions as  to  who  Sargon  was,  made  prior  to  the  decipherment  of  the  in- 
scriptions, cf.  E.  Riehm,  Studien  und  Kritiken,  1868,  158  ff.  For  the 
long  accepted  identity  of  Sargon  and  Shalmaneser,  cf.  F.  Vigouroux, 
La  Bible  et  les  Decouvertes  Modernes^  1889,  IV.  137  if.  For  the 
literature  elicited  by  the  proposal  of  A.  H.  Sayce,  Bab.  and  Orient. 
Record,  II.  18  ff.,  to  identify  Sargon  with  king  Yareb  of  Hos.  5",  lo®, 
cf.  Maspero,  Empires,  222  n. 

°  Oppert,  Ins.  Sarg.,  8. 

^°  C.  50 ;  on  the  basis  of  this  text,  Lyon,  Sargon,  X,  and  Tiele,  Gesch., 
255,  take  the  name  to  mean  the  "  true,  righteous  king  "  while  Winckler, 
Sargon,  XV  explains  it  as  "  The  King  has  set  in  order "  referring  it 
to  the  evident  desire  of  the  king  to  show  himself  the  restorer  of  the  old 
order  of  affairs. 


I» 


28  WESTERN    ASIA   IN   THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

doubt  be  ascribed  the  well-known  archaism  in  art  and  in 
religion,  the  care  for  Babylonia,  perhaps  even  the  founda- 
tion of  a  new  Dur  Sharrukin  in  imitation  of  the  earlier  one 
which  had  borne  Shargani's  name.^^ 

Perhaps  the  most  artistic  and  interesting  result  was  the 
production  of  the  Sargon  legends,  which,  in  all  probability, 
had  long  floated  about  in  popular  story  and  were  now  re- 
touched for  the  glory  of  the  usurper  king.  Of  this  litera- 
ture, two  specimens  have  come  down  to  us.  One  is  an 
omen  tablet  which  reports  the  deeds  done  by  Sargon  or  his 
son  Naram  Sin  under  such  and  such  a  sign  of  the  heavens, 
how  three  years  were  spent  in  the  land  of  the  setting  sun, 
how  the  sea  of  the  setting  sun  was  crossed  and  his  image 
erected,  how  Kastubilla  of  Kagala  was  defeated  and  the  land 
of  Surri,  and  how  a  great  city  was  built  in  his  honor.^^ 

But  if  this  is,  after  all,  only  a  dry  astrological  text,  the 
other  is  one  of  the  gems  of  Assyrian  literature.  The  story 
has  often  been  told  of  how  his  father  he  did  not  know  and 
his  mother,  a  woman  of  low  degree,  bore  him  in  secret,  how, 
like  the  little  Moses,  the  infant  was  placed  in  an  ark  of 
rushes  and  entrusted  to  the  water,  how  the  water  carried 
him  to  the  irrigator  Akki  who  reared  him  and  made  him  a 
gardener  until  the  goddess  Ishtar  came  to  love  him  and 
gave  him  rule  over  the  black-headed  folk  and  granted  him 
victories  over  Dilmun  and  Dur  ilu.^^ 

Beautiful  as  all  this  is,  it  is  so  clearly  legendary  that  we 
cannot  wonder  that  the  earlier  scholars  were  inclined  to 
make  him  an  entirely  mythical  personage.     Even  though 

"  So  we  may  gather  from  the  Michau  Stone,  I.  14  and  from  the  ap- 
pearance of  the  name  in  the  list  II.  R.  50,  I.  26 ;  the  reference  to  a 
Dur  Sharrukin  in  Bah.  Chron.,  III.  46  is  to  the  same  place  according 
to  Winckler,  in  Helmolt,  History  of  the  World,  III.  1903,   102. 

"IV.  R.  34;  translated  Keilinschr.  Bihl.  III.  i.  102  if.  and  often. 

"III.  R.  4,  7;  translated  Keilinschr.  Bihl.  III.  i.  100  ff.  and  often. 


ACCESSION  29 

we  now  know  that  Shargani  actually  lived  and  was  a  great 
ruler,  we  have  no  more  right  to  assume  that  these  legends 
tell  the  truth  than  we  have  to  describe  the  policy  of  Theo- 
doric  the  Ostrogoth  on  the  basis  of  the  romantic  adventures 
of  Dietrich  of  Berne.  Knowing  how  legends  grow  up,  we 
should  be  inclined  to  suspect  the  account  even  if  nearly  con- 
temporary. How  much  more  so  when  it  is  separated  from 
its  subject  by  perhaps  as  long  an  interval  as  that  which 
separates  us  from  Sargon  himself.  The  tablet  of  omens 
comes  from  the  library  of  Ashur  bani  pal  and  bears  his 
mark,^*  while  the  legend  tablet  dates  from  the  eighth  cen- 
tury.^^  But  still  closer  is  the  internal  evidence.  Both  Sar- 
gon the  Younger  and  the  hero  of  these  legends  are  alike  in 
having  no  royal  ancestors.  Both  warred  in  Elam,  and  in 
Syria,  and  at  Dur  ilu,  and  conquered  Tilmun.  Both  crossed 
the  sea  of  the  setting  sun  and  both  erected  a  stele  in  Cyprus. 
The  legendary  hero  refers  to  "my  successor"  (arku),'^^ 
and  sure  enough  arku,  "  the  second,"  is  so  common  a  title  of 
Sargon,  that,  in  the  form  of  Arkeanos,  it  has  come  down  as 
his  name  in  the  Greek-Babylonian  list  of  Ptolemy.^^  All 
this  points  clearly  to  our  time  as  the  date  of  fabrication.^^ 

"  The  actual  name  of  the  king  is  lost,  but  the  formula  is  clearly  that  of 
Ashur  bani  pal,  cf.  Hommel,  Gesch.,  301. 

"So.  G.  Maspero,  Dawn  of  Civilization,  1894,  597;  Rogers,  History, 
Z62. 

"  Legend  20 ;  Arku  frequently  occurs  as  "  later  "  but  with  names,  only, 
so  far  as  I  know,  with  Sargon. 

"  Cf.  n.  8. 

"  G.  Smith,  Trans.  Soc.  Bibl.  Arch.,  I.  47  =  Records  of  the  Past,^  V.  57 
had  already  noted  the  fact  that  this  is  "  clearly  the  text  of  an  usurper  " 
and  had  pointed  out  the  connection  of  name  and  city  with  the  younger 
Sargon  to  whom  he  ascribed  the  preservation  of  the  legends.  H.  F. 
Talbot,  Trans.  Soc.  Bibl.  Arch.,  I.  271  =^  Records  of  the  Past^  V.  2,  sug- 
gested that  it  might  have  been  copied  from  a  statue  and  this  has  been 
accepted  as  a  fact  by  following  writers.  The  most  important  of  the 
reasons  for  not  believing  in  an  early  date  for  these  legends,  were  set 


30  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

What  was  the  character  of  the  man  who,  on  the  death  of 
Shalmaneser  IV  on  the  226.  of  Tebet  (December  28),  722 
B.  C,  came  to  the  throne  ?^^  As  compared  with  the  charac- 
ters in  classical  or  in  mediaeval  Arabic  history,  it  is  difficult 
to  understand  the  personalities  of  the  Assyrian  rulers.  Yet 
the  attempt  may  be  made,  for,  in  spite  of  the  tendency  to 
conform  every  such  ruler  to  a  majestic,  impersonal  type  of 
the  Assyrian  rule  itself,  we  can  see  a  strong  personality 
here.  And  certainly  strength  of  character  must  have  been 
one  of  the  most  important  facts  in  the  man  who  could  usurp 
the  throne,  hold  it  so  well,  extend  its  boundaries,  and  de- 
velop it  internally,  and  then  hand  it  on  to  such  men  as  his 
successors.  With  strength  we  often  associate  coarseness 
and  ferocity.  Judged  by  the  standards  of  our  own  day, 
Sargon  was  horribly  cruel.  Judged  by  those  of  his  own,  he 
was  as  far  from  the  barbarity  of  Ashur  nagir  pal  as  he  was 
from  the  comparative  weakness  of  Esar  haddon.  And  for 
his  cruelty  he  had  his  excuse.  The  Assyrian  empire  was 
still  in  a  precarious  condition;  indeed,  it  never  again  was 
really  safe,  and  firmness  was  absolutely  needful.  If  it  was 
necessary  for  state  reasons  to  flay  a  man  alive,  Sargon  prob- 
ably had  no  compunctions.  That  he  was  not  merely  a  blood- 
thirsty tyrant  there  is  plenty  of  evidence  to  show.  After 
conquest  he  organized  territory.  If  the  administrative 
system  dates  to  Tiglath  Pileser  III  or  even  earlier,  he  at 
least  carried  out  those  designs,  and  so  deserves  the  credit  for 
a  fair  amount  of  political  sagacity. 

forth  by  Hommel,  Gesch.,  305.     Maspero,  Dazvn,  599  has  gone  further, 
rightly,  in  my  opinion. 

"  The  Bab.  Chron.,  I.  29  if.  merely  states  that  Shalmaneser  died  in 
Tebet  and  then  that  Sargon  ascended  the  throne  on  the  twenty-second 
of  the  same  month.  There  is,  however,  no  reason  here  to  assume,  with 
Oppert,  art.  Sargon,  La  Grande  Encyclopedic,  that  Shalmaneser  died  on 
the  first  and  that  there  was  an  interregnum. 


31 

Since  he  gained  the  throne  by  the  aid  of  the  religious 
party,  we  naturally  expect  to  see  something  of  a  religious 
type  in  his  nature.  This  may  have  been  only  affectation, 
but  it  more  probably  was  genuine.  The  simple  soldier  who 
owed  his  throne  to  priestly  aid  was  certainly  grateful.  How 
great  an  influence  the  priestly  party  gained  in  his  reign  may 
be  surmised  by  the  reaction  against  it  in  the  reign  of  his 
son  Sennacherib.  To  how  great  an  extent  Sargon  was 
really  cultivated  we  may  only  conjecture.  There  were  great 
building  enterprises,  there  was  sculpture  of  a  high  type, 
there  was  much  literature  produced.  But  all  this  was  merely 
to  glorify  the  king,  and  we  may  doubt  if  the  soldier  cared 
much  for  art  for  art's  sake. 

Thus,  as  we  attempt  to  find  individual  characteristics,  we 
have  a  sense  of  failure.  Even  his  sculptured  portrait  is  of 
little  value,  for  it  gives  us  only  the  conventional  king.^^ 

The  many  conjectures  previously  made  as  to  the  way 
Sargon  came  to  the  throne-^  are  now  rendered  useless  by 
the  discovery  of  a  bit  of  clay.^^  Prom  this  we  learn  that 
Shalmaneser  had  committed  the  unheard-of  sacrilege  of 
laying  tribute  on  the  old  sacred  city  of  Ashur,^^  the  cradle 
of  Assyrian  power.  Harran,  too,  the  capital  of  that  great 
Mesopotamian  kingdom  which  was  united  with  Assyria  in 
a  sort  of  personal  union,  was  in  the  same  evil  case.^*    The 

^  Sargon  and  his  wazir  occur  on  the  slab,  Botta,  Ninive,  I.  12,  also 
in  Maspero,  Empires,  217.  Cf.  also  the  royal  figure  on  the  tile  facing 
of  the  harem  walls  at  Dur  Sharrukin,  Place,  Ninive,  pi.  27,  which  seems 
to  me  to  be  an  authentic  picture.  The  broad  lips,  pronounced  nose, 
large  ears,  and  thick  neck  seem  to  show  a  certain  coarseness,  but  he 
certainly  has  a  good  forehead.  The  Cyprus  stele  also  gives  a  conven- 
tionalized portrait. 

^^  These  have  now  only  a  historical  interest,  cf.  n.  8. 

^  K.  1349,  published  by  Winckler,  Sammlung,  II.  i  ;  translated  Forsch., 
I.  403  ff. 

^^27-33. 

^'  Cf.  n.  27. 


32  WESTERN    ASIA   IN    THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

god,  Ashur,  became  angry,  overthrew  Shalmaneser,  and 
presented  the  crown  to  Sargon.^^  Translated  into  plain 
English,  Sargon  took  advantage  of  the  insult  thus  offered  to 
the  pride  and  the  pocket-book  of  the  great  cities,  and,  with 
the  aid  of  the  priesthood,  secured  the  throne.  They  had 
their  reward.  During  the  whole  reign  the  priestly  party 
was  high  in  power,  and  a  wave  of  religious  reaction  swept 
over  at  least  the  palace  circle,^^  while  Ashur  and  Harran 
were  once  more  given  their  old  privileges  and  governed 
directly  by  the  crown." 

^°  34  f.  Ashur  was  freed  from  tribute  and. silver  tablets  set  up.  The 
closing  threat  of  revolution  to  whomsoever  changes  the  place  of  this 
work  clearly  refers  to  a  future  king,  Winckler,  op.  cit.,  406. 

^  See  under  religion  in  chapter  on  culture  history. 

"  The  statements  in  regard  to  Ashur  and  Harran  exist  in  two  some- 
what different  recensions.  The  one,  XIV.  5,  D.  10-12,  P.  V.  9-1 1, 
states  that  the  freedom  from  taxation  (zakut)  of  Ashur  and  Harran 
which  had  long  been  forgotten  and  their  constitution  (kidinnutu)  which 
had  fallen  into  abeyance,  were  restored.  The  other,  P.  IV.  9-13,  B. 
8-10,  and,  with  inserted  clause,  Rp.  5,  7,  8  ;  C.  5-6;  Br.  9-10,  13-15, 
calls  Sargon  the  "  restorer  of  the  constitution  of  Ashur  which  had 
fallen  into  abeyance,  who  over  Harran  has  protection  extended,  and  as 
the  man  (gab,  probably  in  the  feudal  sense)  of  the  gods  Anu  and  Dagan, 
inscribed  their  freedom."  How  this  freedom  worked  may  be  seen  from 
K.  5466  =  H.  99,  cf.  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  174,  where  Tab  gil  esharra, 
governor  of  the  city  of  Ashur,  complains  that  ever  since  the  king  freed 
the  city,  the  ilqu  or  feudal  service  of  that  place  has  been  rendered  use- 
less to  him.  He  now  wishes  to  repair  the  palace  but  is  unable  and 
sends  to  the  king.  From  K.  1349,  we  see  that  the  city  of  Ashur  had 
suffered  under  Shalmaneser  but  was  restored  by  Sargon,  and  the  same 
no  doubt,  was  true  of  Harran.  Mez,  Gesch.  Stadt  Harran,  1892,  28  /. 
followed  by  Cheyne,  art.  Haran,  Ency.  Bibl.,  suggests  that  these  privileges 
were  granted  by  Shalmaneser  II  and  were  then  taken  away  after  the 
insurrection  of  763.  It  is  far  more  probable  that  they  were  a  survival 
of  those  it  enjoyed  as  capital  of  the  old  Mesopotamian  kingdom,  Johns, 
Assyr.  Doomsday  Book,  1901,  7,  and  that  one  of  the  indignities  inflicted 
upon  it  was  the  placing  of  an  Assyrian  governor  in  direct  control  of  it. 
The  religious  reaction  for  a  time  secured  its  privileges,  but  when  the 
military   party   once  more   gained   control   under   Sennacherib,    we   find, 


ACCESSION  33 

Yet,  in  spite  of  his  religious  tendencies,  Sargon  was  a 
great  warrior,  and  indeed  the  greater  part  of  his  recorded 
history  consists  of  a  series  of  wars.  No  doubt  there  were 
pressing  questions  of  home  policy,  perhaps  even  there  were 
revolts,  though  we  hear  of  none.  But,  as  is  always  clear  to 
a  usurper,  the  best  way  of  settling  questions  of  legitimacy  is 
by  leading  the  nation  to  victory  in  foreign  wars.  Nor  was 
it  mere  lust  of  conquest  or  needs  of  home  policy  which  kept 
the  armies  of  Satgon  in  the  field  year  after  year.  During 
the  half  century  of  Assyrian  weakness  new  powers  had  come 
into  being,  and  now  Assyria  was  surrounded  by  a  ring  of 
hostile  states,  any  one  of  which  was  not  an  enemy  to  be 
despised,  while  a  union  such  as  afterwards  brought  about 
the  fall  of  the  empire  was  even  now  an  imminent  peril. 

On  the  south  border  little  was  to  be  feared  from  the 
Babylonians,  who  had  been  rendered  unwarlike  by  their  long 
civilization.  But  here  as  elsewhere  there  had  been  a  gradual 
inworking  of  Arab  tribes  of  whom  the  Kaldu  or  Chaldaeans 
were  the  most  important.^^  Under  Babylonian  influence 
they  had  gained  a  certain  veneer  of  civilization.  Their 
leader  was  now  a  certain  Merodach  Baladan  (Marduk  aplu 
iddin),^®  whose  name  shows  his  Babylonian  leanings.    Al- 

in  68s,  a  governor  of  Harran,  80-7-19,  53  =  J.  274.  But  Johns,  /.  c, 
is  clearly  wrong  when  he  states  that  "  it  was  the  constitution  of  Ashur 
and  Harran  that  Sargon  extended  to  the  northern  cities  of  Babylonia," 
for  in  Rp.  i-io  on  which  he  seems  to  rely,  the  order  is  badly  muddled 
and  can  not  be  used  as  a  basis  for  argument.  Reference  to  the  longer 
and  better  accounts  gives  a  more  original  order.  Under  no  circum- 
stances may  we  take  the  reference  in  in  Rp.  5,  7,  8  to  be  to  the  cities 
in  3. 

**  For  the  Aramaean  invasions  cf.,  e.  g.,  Winckler,  in  Helmolt,  His- 
tory of  the  World,  III.  21  /. 

^  Isaiah  39^  is  correct  in  calling  him  Merodach  Baladan,  The  form 
Berodach  Baladan  of  II  Kings  20"  is  a  mere  textual  error.  In  the 
Ptolemaic  Canon,  he  is  called  Mardokempades.  Berossus  seems  to  be 
the    authority    for    the    passage    of    Alexander    Polyhistor    quoted    by 

3 


34  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

ready,  in  731,  he  had  come  into  contact  with  Tiglath  Pileser 
and  had  been  forced  to  pay  tribute.^^  During  the  weaker 
reign  of  Shalmaneser  he  had  extended  his  power  from  his 
home  land  in  Bit  lakin,^^  in  the  marshes  of  the  Tigris  and 
Euphrates,  and  had  won  the  confidence  of  the  Babylonians. 
When,  therefore,  Sargon  usurped  the  Assyrian  throne, 
Merodach  Baladan  was  in  a  position  to  grasp  his  oppor- 
tunity. Babylon  surrendered,  and  soon  after,  on  the  New 
Year's  Day  (April  2),  721,  he  "seized  the  hands  of  Bel," 
was  recognized  as  the  de  jure  king  of  the  South,  and  took 
the  titles  of  "  King  of  Babylon "  and  "  King  of  Shumer 
and  Akkad."^^     The  natives  seem  to  have  welcomed  him 

Eusebius,  Chron.,  ed.  Schone,  I.  27.  He  knows  only  the  short  second 
reign  of  Marodach  Baldanus  in  the  time  of  Senecheribus.  I  do  not 
think  he  is  the  Babada  of  Berossus,  Frag.  13  =  Jos.  Ant.  X.  2.  2. 

^''Nimrud,  Clay  Tablet,  26. 

'^  In  Bit  lakin,  the  masculine  determinative  is  always  used  before 
lakin.  In  A.  228,  315,  D.  122  Merodach  Baladan  is  even  called  a  son 
of  lakin.  Whether  lakin  is  a  historical  personage,  Sayce,  art.  Merodach 
Baladan,  in  Hasting's  Bible  Dictionary,  is  not  certain  but  cf.  the  use  of 
Omri  in  Bit  Humri.  The  land  is  Bit  lakin,  the  capital  Dur  lakin,  see 
further  Chap.  VII.  n.  53. 

^^  Sargon  ascended  the  throne  in  Tebet  while  the  reign  of  Merodach 
Baladan  is  officially  dated  from  Nisan.  Maspero,  Empires,  222,  repre- 
sents this  as  a  period  of  suspense  in  which  Babylon  waited  to  see  if 
Sargon  would  favor  that  city  as  much  as  his  predecessors.  But  Sargon 
later  showed  himself  very  favorable  to  that  city  and  there  is  no  reason 
to  suppose  a  change  of  attitude  during  that  time.  Furthermore,  there 
is  no  mention  of  a  revolt  in  the  Bab.  Chron.,  cf.  Winckler,  Zeitschr. 
f.  Assyr.,  1887,  303.  Maspero  has  simply  failed  to  notice  that,  what- 
ever the  time  he  actually  came  to  the  throne,  his  accession  would  be 
dated  from  the  following  first  of  Nisan  or  New  Year's  Day  when  he 
"  seized  the  hands  of  Bel "  and  became  de  jure  king  of  Babylon. — Ac- 
cording to  the  Babylonian  king  list,  published  Proc.  Soc.  Bibl.  Arch., 
1884,  197,  Merodach  Baladan  was  a  member  of  the  Tamdim  or  ninth 
dynasty  and  ruled  twelve  years.  This  would  make  his  accession  721. 
The  Canon  of  Ptolemy  also  gives  twelve  years.  A  further  clue  to  the 
chronology    is    furnished    by    the    eclipses    of    the    moon    mentioned    in 


ACCESSION  3  5 

as  a  deliverer  from  the  Assyrian  yoke,  at  any  rate  there  cer- 
tainly was  a  strong  pro-Chaldaean  party  in  the  city.^^ 

Merodach  Baladan  was  supported,  not  only  by  the  various 
Aramaean  tribes  but  also  by  Humbanigash  of  Elam.  Al- 
liance with  Elam  had  long  been  a  fundamental  article  in  the 
policy  of  Babylonia.  In  earlier  times  that  country  had  had  a 
long  and  important  career,  often  at  the  expense  of  Babylon. 
Of  late  it  had  been  miuch  weakened,  the  history  becomes  ob- 
scure, and  even  the  succession  of  kings  is  lost.  A  new  era 
began  with  the  accession  of  Humbanigash  in  742  B.  C.^* 
The  earlier  years  of  his  reign  seem  to  have  been  spent  in 
reducing  to  order  the  feudal  princes  who  so  regularly  weak- 
ened the  country.  There  was  peace  with  Assyria,  for  a  long 
line  of  Aramaic  buffer  states  protected  Elam  from  her  more 
powerful  neighbor.  But  Tiglath  Pileser  conquered  and 
incorporated  these  states,  while  he  also  obtained  personal 
rule  in  Babylon.  This  brought  Elam  into  great  danger. 
The  Chaldaean  conquest  of  Babylon  must  greatly  weaken 
Assyria  and  protect  a  considerable  stretch  of  Elamitish 
border  from  Assyrian  attack.  We  can  therefore  see  why 
Humbanigash  preferred  to  fight  his  battles  for  Elam  on  the 
plains  of  Babylonia. 

The  situation  in  regard  to  Elam  was  further  complicated 
by  the  Median  tribes  which  were  gradually  working  their 

Ptolemy's  Almagest,  IV.  5.  They  are  said  to  have  taken  place  on  the 
29/30  of  Thoth  of  the  first  year  and  the  18/19  Thoth  and  15/16 
Phamenoth  of  the  second  of  Mardokerapades.  According  to  F.  Ginzel, 
Sitzungsher.  of  Vienna  Academy,  1884  (89),  II.  537  and  E.  v.  Haerdtl, 
Denkschriften  of  the  same,  1885  (49),  194,  they  are  to  be  assigned  to 
March  19,  720,  and  March  8  and  September  i,  719,  these  astronomical 
dates  being,  of  course,  one  year  later  than  those  commonly  in  use. — 
For  the  titles  of  Merodach  Baladan,  see  the  boundary  inscription. 

'^  This  is  shown  by  the  references  in  the  boundary  inscription  to  the 
sufferings  of  the  pro-Chaldaean  party  at  the  hands  of  the  Assyrians. 

^  Bab.  Chron.  I.  9. 


36  WESTERN    ASIA   IN   THE  DAYS   OF   SARGON 

way  in  from  the  east,  and,  like  the  Aramaeans,  were  warring 
against  Elam  and  Assyria  alike.  As  yet,  the  danger  was 
not  serious.  A  force  was  constantly  engaged  on  the  borders 
and  now  and  then  we  hear  of  the  conquest  of  some  petty 
tribe.  Already  Iranian  and  Aramaean  were  meeting  at  the 
Zab,  as  Hun  and  Saracen  later  met  in  Central  Europe. 

Reaching  in  a  great  arc  from  northeast  to  northwest 
were  the  provinces  and  dependencies  of  the  empire  which,  in 
the  half  century  of  Assyrian  decline,  had  become  the  most 
powerful  in  Western  Asia.  Coming  down  from  the  region 
of  the  Caucasus,  the  Haldians  had  gradually  forced  their 
way  south  until,  in  the  reign  of  Ashur  nagir  pal,  they  had 
come  into  touch  with  the  Assyrians.  For  a  time  they  were 
held  in  check,  but  as  Assyria  began  to  decline,  Haldia  won 
and  held  the  supremacy  of  the  civilized  world  under  the 
vigorous  rule  of  Menuash  and  Argishtish  I.  When  the 
Assyrian  power  once  more  revived  under  Tiglath  Pileser 
III,  Sardurish  II,  the  successor  of  Argishtish,  held  all  of 
Armenia,  Western  Mesopotamia,  Western  Asia  Minor,  and 
North  Syria  more  or  less  completely  under  his  control.^** 
To  be  sure,  all  this  extent  of  territory  was  rather  imposing 
than  effective,  for  time  enough  had  not  been  allowed  for  a 
real  amalgamation,  yet  the  pro-Haldian  party  was  strong 
and  a  severe  struggle  was  needed  to  drive  Sardurish  out  of 
Syria.  Tiglath  Pileser  followed  this  up  with  an  invasion  of 
Haldia  itself  but,  although  the  capital,  Tushpa,  was  taken 
and  burned,  Sardurish  held  out  on  the  high  isolated  rock 
which  forms  the  citadel  of  Van,  and  the  Assyrians  were 
forced  to  retreat  as  winter  came  on.^^ 

"  The  Sardurish  of  inscriptions  1-3  of  Belck  and  Lehmann  is  clearly 
the  Seduri  of  the  account  of  Shalmaneser  II.  I  have  therefore  counted 
the  opponent  of  Tiglath  Pileser  as  Sardurish  II. 

**  For  a  general  sketch  of  Haldian  history,  and  a  bibliography,  see  the 
New  International  Encyclopedia,  art.  Chaldians.    I  have  used  the  form, 


ACCESSION  37 

When  a  new  ruler,  Rusash,  son  of  Sardurish,  or  Ursa,  as 
Sargon  calls  him,  ascended  the  throne,  some  time  about 
725,2^  the  imperial  position  of  Haldia  had  been  largely 
lost.  The  new  monarch,  as  events  quickly  showed, 
was  well  adapted  to  restore  the  lost  prestige  of  his 
people.  His  first  care  seems  to  have  been  the  restora- 
tion of  the  ruined  city.  The  older  town,  Menuahina, 
founded  by  Menuash,  the  greatest  of  the  Haldian  builders, 
had  been  completely  destroyed.  Rusash  rebuilt  it,  not  on 
the  old  site,  but  further  north  where  we  now  have  Toprak 
Kaleh,  and  called  is  Rusahina.  Since  the  water  of  Lake 
Van  is  not  potable,  he  constructed,  far  to  the  east  among  the 
barren  and  desert  wastes,  where  his  inscription  has  been 
found,  an  immense  reservoir,  now  known  as  Keshish  Goll, 
or  Priests'  Sea.^^  At  Van^^  and  at  Aluchalu,  oh  Lake 
Gokcha,*^  temples  were  also  erected  to  Teishbash,  the  storm 
and  air  god. 

Haldia,  derived  from  the  god  Haldish  in  preference  to  the  Assyrian 
form  Urartu,  the  Hebrew  Ararat.  In  the  official  inscriptions,  Urartu  is 
always  spelled  phonetically  but  in  the  letters  is  given  as  Urtu  (ki),  the 
same  sign  being  used  as  for  Akkad,  Briinnow  7309.  The  use  of  Urte  in 
the  Haldian  inscription,  Sayce  LXXXH,  seems  to  show  that  Urartu  was  a 
foreign  word  and  was  only  later  applied  to  the  Haldians.  For  the 
survival  of  the  Haldians  as  Chaldoi  or  Chaldaioi  in  Greek  and  Byzantine 
literature  see  an  article  by  the  author,  Amer.  Jour.  Sent.  Lit.,  1901, 
Rost,  Mittheil.  Vorderasiat.  Gesellsch.,  1897,  2,  74,  compares  the  Uarutha 
of  Ptol.  V.  12.  5. 

^  Sargon's  scribes  call  him  Ursa  and  this  name  has  hitherto  been  used 
by  scholars.  In  A.  58,  75  he  is  called  Rusa  and  this  agrees  with  the 
native  form  Rusash.  Brosset,  Melanges  Asiatiques,  7,  397  n."  identifies 
Rusash  with  the  Hratchea  of  later  Armenian  tradition,  Moses  Chor- 
enensis,  I.  22  =  p.  103  of  the  Venice,  1827  edition.  It  might  be  ob- 
jected that  he  is  there  made  a  contemporary  of  Nabugodonosor  (Nebu- 
chadnezzar) ;  but  when  later  we  are  told  that  he  is  twenty-four  years 
before  Senekerim  (Sennacherib),  we  have  his  time  well  enough  indi- 
cated to  make  the  suggestion  very  plausible. 

^  For  the  inscription,  see  chap.  I.  n.  58. 

'*  The  Teishbash  Van  inscription,  see  chap.  I.  n.  58. 

*"  See  chap.  I.  n.  60. 


38  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

The  accession  of  a  new  and  more  vigorous  ruler  naturally 
meant  a  more  vigorous  foreign  policy.  Scanty  as  our 
sources  are,  we  are  still  not  left  in  entire  ignorance  of  con- 
ditions along  the  frontier.  At  Aluchalu,  on  Lake  Gokcha, 
and  therefore  well  within  present  Russian  territory,  we  have 
an  inscription.*^  Its  very  position  shows  a  considerable  ad- 
vance to  be  probable.  It  also  mentions  twenty-four  coun- 
tries which  had  been  conquered,  although  the  vagueness  of 
our  present  geography  gives  us  little  clue  to  their  location,"*^ 
whose  inhabitants  were  carried  off  to  Haldia.  On  the  east, 
a  similar  advance  seems  to  be  demanded  by  the  sovereignty 
of  Mugaqir.  On  the  west,  however,  where  the  earlier  kings 
had  ruled  as  far  as  Melitene,*^  the  boundary  had  been  drawn 
back,  for  at  this  time  that  place  was  ruled  by  an  independent 
prince.^*  From  the  circumstances  presupposed  by  Sargon's 
frontier  fortifications,  we  must  assume  that  the  Euphrates 
was  here  the  boundary.*^  On  the  south  was  the  greatest 
danger.  Here  the  line  ran  a  perilously  short  distance  south 
of  the  capital,  which  was  thus  exposed  to  raiding.  But  in 
this  matter  of  raiding  the  Haldians  had  the  advantage,  for 
it  was  easy  for  a  band  of  the  mountaineers  to  rush  down 
upon  some  undefended  spot  in  Assyria,  while  the  heavier 

"  Cf.  n.  40. , 

"  These  are  Adahumish,  Uelidash,  Kumeruhish,  Shiriquqinish,  Lainish, 
Ubimesh,  Shamatuaish,  Teriuisaish,  Risuaish,  Zuaish,  Akuash,  Amanaish, 
Irquimaish,  Elaish,  Ereltuaish,  Aidamaniush,  Guriash,  Alzirash,  Piruaish, 
Melaish,  Usheduish,  Atezaish,  Eriaish,  Azamerunis.  Shiriquqinish  is  also 
mentioned  on  Sayce  LXXXII.  According  to  Sayce,  Jour.  Roy.  Asiat. 
Sac,  1882,  399,  Zuaish  is  Yazlu  tash  near  Melasgert ;  but  he  is  doubtful 
as  to  whether  the  Zuaish  mentioned  here  is  the  same  place.  Guriaish,  or, 
as  it  is  here  in  the  accusative,  Guriaini,  at  once  makes  us  think  of 
Guriana  of  the  epistolary  literature  and  of  the  classical  Guraina,  cf. 
chap.  IV.  n.  42. 

"Argishtish  I,  Annals,  II.  18. 

"A.  183,  etc. 

«  Cf.  chap.  IV.  n.  44. 


ACCESSION  39 

armies  of  the  latter  would  be  under  considerable  difficulties, 
if  a  return  expedition  was  undertaken.  Regular  military 
expeditions  in  this  region  were  few  and  brief.  The  Hal- 
dians  had  only  to  retire  to  their  fortresses  and  allow  the 
enemy  to  ravage  as  he  pleased,  then,  when  the  early  winter 
forced  him  to  retreat,  they  issued  forth,  blocked  the  passes, 
harrassed  the  rear,  and  often  inflicted  great  damage. 

The  influence  of  Rusash  must  not  be  confined  to  the  region 
he  ruled.  With  Merodach  Baladan,  with  whom  he  may 
have  been  allied,*^  he  was  the  cause  of  almost  every  war 
of  the  reign.  Could  these  two  be  put  out  of  the  way,  the 
remaining  conquests  would  not  be  difficult. 

Back  of  the  Haldians  and  no  doubt  already  exerting  pres- 
sure on  them,  were  other  Iranian  tribes.  As  yet,  they  seem 
to'liave  been  unknown  to  the  Assyrians.  By  the  end  of  the 
reign  they  would  be  known  only  too  well.  Had  the  Assy- 
rians realized  that  in  attacking  and  destroying  the  neighbor- 
ing states  they  were  but  putting  out  of  the  way  buffer  states 
whose  loss  would  expose  themselves  to  attack,  they  might 
have  hesitated.  More  probably  it  would  not  have  changed 
conditions. 

On  the  northwest  frontier  there  was  little  danger,  but 
much  inducement.  Only  one  object  blocked  the  way.  Car- 
chemish,  a  fragment  of  the  old  "  Hittite  "  *^  power,  held  the 
way  to  Syria  and  to  Asia  Minor  and  dominated  the  trade 
route  to  the  west.  Mercantile  as  well  as  political  reasons 
were  therefore  demanding  the  removal  of  this  eyesore  to  the 
Assyrian  merchants.  Once  Carchemish  passed,  there  re- 
mained only  petty  Hittite  states  to  conquer.  The  way  was 
open  to  a  re-conquest  of  those  Asia  Minor  possessions  held 

"Professor  N.  Schmidt  has  long  held  this  view. 

"  Whatever  one  may  think  of  the  "  Hittite  Empire,"   "  Hittite  "   is  a 
convenient  name  to  apply  to  this  fairly  homogeneous  group  of  peoples. 


40  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

in  the  earlier  days  of  Assyrian  greatness,  to  Pteria,  the  great 
Hittite  city,  perhaps  to  the  Black  Sea  itself.  Of  the  power 
which,  under  Midas  of  Phrygia,  was  rapidly  conquering 
Asia  Minor,  the  Assyrians  seem  as  yet  to  have  known 
nothing. 

Syria  had  been  virtually  brought  under  the  control  of 
Assyria  by  Tiglath  Pileser  and  a  large  addition  to  the  im- 
mediate territory  of  Assyria  had  been  made  when  Shalma- 
neser  captured  Samaria  and  brought  the  Israelitish  kingdom 
to  its  end.  But  the  revolution  at  home  had  for  the  moment 
weakened  Assyrian  influence  in  this  region.  Affairs  in 
Israel  were  still  in  a  very  unsettled  condition.  In  Hamath 
and  in  Gaza  rulers  of  ability  seemed  about  to  unite  Syria 
against  the  Assyrians.  In  Judaea  the  young  Hezekiah  had 
but  recently  come  to  the  throne."*^    His  religious  reformation 

*'  We  have  no  definite  knowledge  of  the  chronology  of  Kings  save  as 
we  can  connect  it  with  that  of  foreign  nations.  The  whole  scheme  is 
artificial,  although  tradition  may  have  handed  down  a  rough  guess  as  to 
the  length  or  shortness  of  the  reigns.  We  should  naturally  expect  that 
the  correct  lengths  of  the  reigns  might  have  been  handed  down,  did  not 
the  purely  artificial  character  of  the  whole  system  and  the  failure  to 
agree  with  external  chronology  where  tested  forbid.  If  we  make  the 
corrections  which  such  external  tests  demand,  we  have  a  working  chron- 
ology which  will  do  well  enough ;  for  it  will  not  be  many  years  out  of 
the  way,  but  it  is  not  allowable  to  take  such  a  chronology  and  assume 
it  to  be  at  all  exact.  For  the  reign  of  Hezekiah,  the  only  certain  date 
is  701,  when  Senacherib  invaded  Judah.  According  to  H  Kings  18^' 
this  took  place  in  the  fourteenth  year  of  Hezekiah,  that  is,  his  accession 
was  in  715.  Yet  three  verses  before,  the  capture  of  Samaria,  723,  is 
placed  in  Hezekiah's  sixth  year,  that  is,  his  accession  took  place  in  729. 
In  the  face  of  such  chronology,  we  can  only  refuse  to  accept  any  part  of 
it.  We  can  use,  to  secure  an  approximate  date  for  his  accession,  only 
general  considerations.  Uncertain  as  their  results  may  be,  they  at  least 
do  not  rest  on  a  thoroughly  artificial  and  unreliable  chronology.  The 
date  of  accession  seems  bound  up  with  the  question  of  that  of  Merodach 
Baladan's  embassy,  for  I  do  not  see  how  the  fact  of  such  an  embassy 
can  be  denied.  The  present  position  of  the  account,  at  the  end  of  the 
events  of  the  reign  is  easily  explained.      A  passage  which  closes  with 


ACCESSION  41 

looked  very  much  like  a  protest  against  the  pro-Assyrian 
religious  policy  of  his  father  Ahaz,*^  and  an  embassy  from 
Merodach  Baladan  had  just  come  to  him  urging  revolt.^^ 
Egypt  was  recovering  herself  under  Ethiopic  hegemony 
and  had  already  interfered  in  the  Samaria  aflfair.^^  In 
Arabia  things  were  in  a  ferment  as  a  result  of  the  impending 
change  from  Minaean  to  Sabaean  overlordship,^^  while  all 
along  its  borders  new  swarms  were  pouring  out  and  pressing 
upon  the  civilized  nations.^^ 

Such  were  the  circumstances  of  the  Assyrian  neighbors, 
and  such  were  the  problems  presented  to  Sargon.  On  all 
sides  Assyria  was  hard  pressed  by  nations  less  civilized 

peace  and  truth  enduring  all  his  days  would  naturally  make  a  fine  close. 
Actually,  it  must  be  placed  near  the  beginning  of  the  account  of  the 
reign,  for  no  one  can  doubt  that  all  that  part  which  deals  with  the  in- 
vasion of  Sennacherib  is  later.  But  if  early,  why  not  at  the  very  be- 
ginning, say  721  ?  Hezekiah  ascended  the  throne  young.  He  at  once 
began  a  religious  reform  which  was  to  a  certain  extent  anti-Assyrian 
and  in  other  ways,  then  or  later,  showed  his  desire  for  independence. 
What  more  natural  than  that,  at  his  own  accession,  the  other,  anti- 
Assyrian  party  should  come  into  control,  especially  if,  about  the  same 
time,  there  was  a  revolution  in  Assyria  itself  and  if  the  troops  which 
had  just  taken  Samaria  were  called  home.  Such  a  feeling  of  unrest 
would  be  very  natural  at  such  a  time  and  Merodach  Baladan  would 
naturally  send  an  embassy  to  strengthen  the  anti-Assyrian  party.  The 
result,  then,  of  all  these  causes,  would  be  the  revolt  of  720  which,  for 
the  time,  seems  to  have  practically  ended  Assyrian  control  of  Syria. 
A  trace  of  this  complicity  of  Hezekiah  is  probably  to  be  seen  in  the 
laudu  of  Nimrud  8  which  is  mentioned  just  before  Hamath.  To  place 
the  embassy  in  the  second  reign  of  Merodach  Baladan  is  difficult,  for  his 
rule  was  short  and  insecure.  This  combination  given,  though  not  as 
strong  as  I  might  wish,  seems  to  me  to  meet  the  demands  of  the  data 
to  be  combined  better  than  does  any  other. 

«n  Kings  18*  ff. 

~  n  Kings  20^2  ff^ 

"  See  a  fuller  discussion  in  the  next  chapter. 

^^  See  for  a  brief  sketch,  Winckler,  in  Helmolt,  History  of  the  World. 
III.  248. 

■^Cf.  n.  28. 


42  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

than  herself.  It  was  impossible  for  Assyria  to  hold  her 
present  frontiers,  for  only  in  a  few  cases  were  these  "  sci- 
entific." Only  by  constant  advances  could  enemies  be  put 
out  of  the  way,  while  each  new  advance  meant  a  longer 
frontier  to  guard,  a  larger  mass  of  unassimilated  peoples 
within  it,  and  a  further  depletion  of  the  governing  class. 
The  task  was  too  great  for  so  small  a  people  and  ultimate 
failure  was  certain.  Yet  it  was  a  great  thing  for  civilization 
that  the  barbarian  peoples  were  held  back  until  they  had 
more  or  less  come  under  the  influence  of  the  Assyro-Baby- 
lonian  culture,  and  that  the  empire  endured  so  long  as  it 
did  was  due  in  no  small  measure  to  the  hard  fighting  quali- 
ties of  Sargon. 


CHAPTER   III 

BABYLONIA  AND  SYRIA 

Sargon  ascended  the  throne  at  the  very  end  of  722.^ 
What  he  did  during  the  first  year  we  do  not  know.  In  all 
probability  he  was  engaged  in  settling  himself  firmly  on  the 
throne  and  in  arranging  the  changes  he  found  necessary 
from  his  point  of  view.- 

It  was  impossible  for  an  Assyrian  monarch  to  live 
in  peace.  Even  if  he  wished  to  do  so,  circumstances 
were  against  him.  So  far  as  we  know,  the  first  col- 
lision with  a  foreign  power  took  place  in  Babylonia 
some  time  in  720.  Merodach  Baladan,  as  soon  as  he  was 
safe  in  Babylon,  had  sent  to  Humbanigash  for  aid,  and 
now  the  Elamite  was  attempting  to   descend  the  Aft   ab 

*  According  to  Haerdtl's  tables,  cf.  chap.  II,  n.  32,  Tebet  must  have 
begun  Dec.  6  and  therefore  the  accession  date,  Tebet  22  was  Dec.  28. 
The  formal  first  year  of  Sargon,  beginning  in  Nisan,  was  April  2  to 
March  22.  This  is  of  course  on  the  assumption  that  a  month  was  inter- 
calated at  the  end  of  the  accession  year. 

^  The  Annals  places  the  Merodach  Baladan  troubles  in  year  I,  721, 
and  this  has  generally  been  accepted.  But  K.  1349,  places  it  in  year  II, 
720,  apparently  the  very  year  in  which  the  inscription  itself  was  written. 
The  Bah.  Chron.,  I.  33  dates  these  events  in  the  second  of  Merodach 
Baladan  which  means  the  same  thing.  Winckler,  Forsch.  1.  402  n.,^  has 
therefore  rightly  doubted  it.  A  further  indication  of  the  untrustworthi- 
ness  of  the  Annals  is  of  course  the  earlier  and  no  doubt  better  chronol- 
ogy of  the  Prisms.  L.  i  of  Rm.  2,  97  (722)  has  kar'\ru,  the  somewhat 
obscure  word  which  probably  means  either  the  destruction  preparatory 
to  rebuilding  or  the  restoration  of  a  public  edifice.  L.  2;  for  721,  has 
ilu  X  ana  beti  eshshi  e'\tarah,  "god  X  entered  a  new  temple,"  the 
natural  result  of  the  preceding  line.  It  is  curious  that  we  have  no 
reference  to  the  accession  of  Sargon  or  to  his  wars. 

43 


44  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

valley  to  join  his  ally.  But  Sargon  still  held  Dur  ilu,  a 
strong  fortress  which  commanded  that  pass.^  When  the 
Elamites  reached  the  plain  they  found  an  Assyrian  army 
drawn  up  to  meet  them.  A  battle  took  place  and  the 
Assyrians  were  driven  from  the  field,  although  they  still 
held  Dur  ilu.*  The  Assyrians  retreated  to  the  north,  though 
not  so  rapidly  but  that  they  could  take  vengeance  on  the 
petty  Aramaean  tribes  of  the  Mattisai  and  Tu'muna,  whose 
pro-Assyrian  sheikh  had  been  bound  and  sent  to  Babylon.'^ 
But  now  Merodach  Baladan  came  up  with  his  army  and 
united  with  Humbanigash,  after  which  they  ravaged  the 
nearby  parts  of  Assyria.® 

A  tactical  victory  had  thus  been  won  by  the  allies.    The 

'  Dur  ilu  is  Zirzir  tepe  at  the  mouth  of  the  Aft  ab  valley  according 
to  A.  Billerbeck,  Suleimania,  1898,  69,  97.  We  know  that  Sargon  held 
Dur  ilu  in  his  first  and  his  eleventh  years  from  the  so  called  Sargon 
Stone,  F.  E.  Peiser,  Keilinschriftliche  Aden  Stilcke,  1889,  6  ff.;  extracts 
in  Keilinschr.  Bibl.,  IV.  158  ff.  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  112,  seems  to  think 
that  between  these  two  dates  Sargon  lost  and  regained  control  of  Dur 
ilu,  but  there  is  no  proof,  and  it  is  hardly  probable.  A.  228-235,  though 
under  year  XII,  furnishes  some  information  in  regard  to  this  period.  A. 
234  reads  iqgura  tahazu.  This  has  been  referred  to  a  battle  earlier 
than  Dur  ilu  by  Winckler,  Sargon,  XVI.  It  is  also,  it  would  appear, 
the  basis  of  the  statement  of  Billerbeck,  Susa,  77,  that  a  small  Susian 
army  was  sent  to  join  a  Babylonian  corps  in  driving  the  Assyrians  from 
the  Umliash  region  but  was  defeated  in  consequence  of  the  non-arrival 
of  their  allies.  This  passage  is  better  explained  by  Tiele,  Gesch.,  258, 
and  the  reason  for  such  a  battle  disappears. 

*Bah.  Chron.,  I.  34  if.  Sargon  claims  the  victory,  A.  19;  XIV.  6  ; 
N.  7;  C.  17;  D.  23;  P.  IV.  13;  S.  I.  27,  but  I  have  no  doubt  of  the 
Babylonian  account  being  correct.  For  the  retention  of  Dur  ilu,  see  the 
Sargon  Stone. 

**  A.  20  if.;  C.  18.  The  Mattisai  are  mentioned  only  in  C.  but  their 
connection  with  the  Tu'muna  makes  it  probable  that  they  belong  here. 
The  men  were  settled  in  Syria  but  this  does  not  necessarily  mean  Israel, 
as  Tiele,  Gesch.,  258.  The  Tu'muna  occur  also  Sennacherib,  Prism. 
I.  41. 

^  Bah.  Chron.,  I.  c. 


BABYLONIA   AND   SYRIA  45 

Aft  ab  valley  was  opened  and  free  communications  with 
Elam  secured.  For  twelve  years  no  Assyrian  army  invaded 
Babylonia,  and  Merodach  Baladan  was  left  to  his  own  de- 
vices. But  one  great  mistake  was  made.  Dur  ilu  was  left, 
perhaps  because,  after  all,  the  armies  were  too  small,  in  the 
hands  of  the  Assyrians.  So  long  as  they  held  it,  communi- 
cations between  the  allies  were  always  subject  to  interrup- 
tion, while  it  formed  a  good  base  for  intrigues  with  the 
anti-Chaldaean  party  in  Babylon  or  for  actual  military  op- 
erations. So  long  as  an  advanced  post  such  as  this  was  at 
the  very  doors  of  Babylon,  the  southern  question  could  not 
be  considered  settled^ 

In  this  same  year,  720,^  Sargon  was  able  to  devote  atten- 
tion to  the  threatening  state  of  affairs  in  Syria,  which 
seems  to  have  been  completely  neglected  since  the  capture 
of  Samaria  by  Shalmaneser  in  723.^     Now  all  Syria  was 

'  Failure  to  follow  up  advantages  is  made  by  Winckler,  Sargon,  XVIII, 
n.  3,  to  be  due  to  the  intrigues  of  the  priestly  party  at  Babylon  who  were 
naturally  in  favor  of  Sargon.  In  Gesch.,  125  If.,  Winckler  argues  that 
Sargon  ruled  at  least  Kutha  as  he  bears  the  title  "  King  of  the  Four 
World  Regions.''"  But  Wilcken,  Zeitschr.  Deutsch.  Morg.  Ges.,  1893, 
482,  denies  the  point  of  the  title  and  notes  that  on  the  boundary  in- 
scription of  Merodach  Baladan  we  have  a  shaku,  or  mayor,  of  Kutha. 
The  title  may  therefore  have  been  based  only  on  the  holding  of  Dur  ilu, 
Winckler,  Forsch.,  I.  97.  But  it  is  also  possible  that  the  office  was  only 
titular.  At  any  rate,  Rm.  2,  97,  1.  4  (719)  should  be  restored  ushshu 
sha  hit  Nerlgal  karru,  "  the  foundations  of  the  house  of  Nergal  pre- 
pared." If  this  was  really  the  great  house  of  Nergal  at  Kutha  which 
was  thus  restored  by  Sargon,  then  Sargon  held  it.  It  is  also  worthy 
of  note  that  Kutha  did  not  need  to  be  captured  in  710.  The  occupation 
of  Kutha  by  the  Assyrians  would  of  course  be  dangerous  in  the  extreme 
to  Babylon. 

*Both  the  Annals  and  K.  1349  agree  in  placing  this  in  720,  while 
Prism  B.  seems  also  to  fit  in  with  this  date. 

"  The  question  of  the  captor  of  Samaria  has  been  discussed  by  the 
author  in  the  Amer.  Jour.  Sem.  Lang.,  1905,  179  ff.  It  was  there  con- 
cluded   that    the   honor    must   be    given    to    Shalmaneser.       A    resume 


46  vVESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE    DAYS   OF    HaK'-OX 

again  in  revolt,  the  two  centers  being  at  Hamath  under 
laubidi  and  at  Gaza  under  Hanunu. 

of  the  reasons  there  given  may  not  be  out  of  place.  Sargon  claims 
the  conquest  of  Samaria  for  himself.  But,  according  to  his  own  ad- 
mission, this  capture  took  place  in  the  resh  sharruti,  or  part  of  his  reign 
before  his  first  New  Year.  This  New  Year  began  probably  April  2, 
while  he  ascended  the  throne  December  28,  see  n.  i.  We  thus  have 
four  months,  in  the  worst  part  of  the  year,  the  rainy  season.  The 
Assyrians,  as  it  would  appear,  rarely  took  the  field  in  the  winter  and 
a  regular  expedition  at  this  time  would  be  very  difficult.  We  saw  some- 
thing of  the  mud  which  can  be  found  at  the  end  of  March  while  in 
Syria.  Taking  into  consideration  the  somewhat  untrustworthy  character 
of  the  Annals  and  its  allied  documents,  as  well  as  the  fact  that  we 
have  no  reference  to  any  capture  of  Samaria  in  K.  1349  of  year  II  or 
in  the  Nimrud  inscription  of  year  VI  or  thereabouts,  the  earlier  docu- 
ments, we  may  well  doubt  the  accuracy  of  Sargon's  statement.  But  to 
negative  we  may  add  positive  evidence.  II  Kings  17^"°  is  a  good  source, 
going  back  to  practically  contemporaneous  records.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  the  "  king  of  Assyria  "  of  verses  4-6  was  intended  by  the 
author  for  the  Shalmaneser  of  verse  3.  There  is  here  no  reason  for  the 
Hebrew  writer  not  telling  the  truth,  for  it  mattered  nothing  to  him,  or 
to  the  fame  of  his  people,  if  Shalmaneser  rather  than  Sargon  took 
Samaria.  Then  either  he  made  a  mistake,  which  is  hardly  likely,  or  he 
told  the  truth.  Further  confirmation  is  fotmd  in  the  Babylonian 
Chronicle,  I.  28,  where  the  only  event  of  Shalmaneser's  reign  is  the 
capture  of  a  certain  Shamara'in.  So  far  as  the  Babylonian  Chronicle 
is  concerned,  this  only  gives  us  727  and  722  as  limits.  But  these  can 
be  reduced  by  reference  to  the  Assyrian  Chronicle.  The  expedition 
cannot  have  taken  place  in  727  for  the  ana,  "to  [the  land  X]"  comes 
before  the  account  of  Shalmaneser's  accession.  This  is  confirmed  by 
Bab.  Chron.,  I.  24,  where  we  learn  that  he  reigned  only  the  three  winter 
months  of  727.  Winckler,  Gesch.  Bab.  und  Assyr.,  1892,  2ZZ,  is  thus 
incorrect  in  placing  the  fall  of  Shamarain  in  this  year.  Nor  can  we 
place  it  in  726,  as  does  Maspero,  Empires,  212,  for  Assyr.  Chron.  reads 
for  that  year  ina  mati,  "  in  the  land,"  which  means  that  •  there  was 
no  expedition  that  year.  722  is  likewise  excluded,  for  Rm.  2,  97  reads 
for  the  year  kar'\ru  which  refers  only  to  building  operations.  We  have 
thus  left  only  725-23.  When  we  find  that  for  these  three  years  and 
only  these  three  years,  we  have  expeditions  mentioned,  when  we  re- 
member that  the  siege  of  Samaria  lasted  three  years,  and  when  we  note 
that  the  Bab.  Chron.  knew  only  the  capture  of  Shamarain  for  this  reign, 
we  are  forced  to  assume  that  this  triangular  coincidence  cannot  be  an 
accident,  and  that  each  refers  to  the  same  event. 


BABYLONIA   AND    SYRIA  4/ 

In  earlier  times  Hamath  had  been  of  great  importance  as 
the  most  southerly  of  the  great  Hittite  cities.^^  In  the  reign 
of  Tiglath  Pileser,  it  was  definitely  brought  under  Assyrian 
control,  though  not  yet  made  a  province.^^  The  constant 
presence  of  Assyrian  troops  in  Syria  during  the  last  days 
of  Shalmaneser  must  have  kept  it  quiet,  and  so  it  was 
probably  in  the  usurpation  of  Sargon  that  laubidi  saw  the 
opportunity  for  a  like  usurpation  of  his  own.  According  to 
the  testimony  of  his  name,  he  was  of  the  newer  Aramaean 

The  identification  of  Shamarain  and  Samaria  was  first  made  by 
Delitzsch,  Lit.  Central  Blatt,  Sept.  17,  1887,  38,  1290  and  is  still  defended 
by  him,  Assyr.  Lesestiicke*  1900  sub  voce.  Paul  Haupt,  Proc.  Amer. 
Orient  Soc.,  1887,  CCLX,  has  accepted  it  and  has  shown  that  there  are 
no  phonetic  laws  to  prevent  it,  Winckler,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  II.  351,  to 
the  contrary  notwithstanding.  Halevy,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  II.  402  and 
often,  reads  Shabarain  and  equates  with  the  Sibrain  of  Ezek.  47^"  which 
he  makes  also  the  Biblical  Sepharvaim  and  the  modern  Shomerieh.  But 
there  is  no  real  reason  for  reading  ha  for  ma,  while  reference  to  Sibrain 
is  unjustifiable,  Ezekiel  40-48  is  very  late  and  the  text  is  so  corrupt 
in  47"  that  no  definite  places  can  be  depended  upon,  cf.  the  Septuagint. 
Winckler,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  I.  c,  objects  that  the  author  of  the  Bah, 
Chron.  could  hardly  have  been  interested  in  the  capture  of  far  away 
Samaria.  But,  even  if  the  author  did  not  live  in  a  time  when  Syria  was 
under  Babylonian  control,  was  not  Shalmaneser  at  the  time  of  the  cap- 
ture King  of  Babylon  by  the  grace  of  Bel  ?  And  was  not  Merodach 
Baladan  interested  a  few  years  later  with  affairs  in  Judah  ?  Or  was 
Shomerieh  better  known  at  Babylon  than  Samaria?  To  sum  up,  for 
the  capture  of  Samaria  by  Sargon,  we  have  only  his  own  claim,  made 
in  a  late  series  of  documents  which  have  often  been  proved  incorrect. 
Against  it,  we  have  the  silence  of  his  own  earlier  accounts  with  the 
direct  ascription  of  the  capture  by  Shalmaneser  by  two  authorities,  widely 
separated  and  unprejudiced,  while  a  third,  a  native  Assyrian  one,  gives 
data  which  fit  well  into  the  scheme.  It  will,  therefore,  not  be  difficult 
to  assume  that  Samaria  was  taken  by  Shalmaneser  in  723. 

"  The  cuneiform  form  of  the  Biblical  Hamath  varies  between  Ham- 
matu  and  Amattu.  The  name  still  lingered  into  Greek  times  as  Amathe, 
Jos.  Ant.,  I.  6.  2  although  partially  supplanted  by  the  Seleucid  Epiphania. 
It  is  now  called  Hama.      We  visited  it  July,  1904. 

"Annals,  152.      Enilu  was  ruler  at  the  time. 


48  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

stock  which  was  now  supplanting  the  older  Hittite ;  though 
that  this  gives  a  proof  that  the  Hebrew  Yahweh  was  wor- 
shiped in  Hamath  is  not  certain. ^^  While  laubidi  was  the 
nominal  leader  of  the  revolt,  we  must  see  the  real  instigator 
no  doubt  in  Rusash,  the  Haldian,  whose  influence  in  North 
Syria  must  still  have  been  strong.^^  Of  the  other  cities  en- 
gaged, Arpad  had  but  recently  been  the  great  center  of 
Haldian  influence  in  Syria  and  had  been  taken  only  after  a 
three  years'  siege.^*  Damascus  had  lost  its  independence 
only  fifteen  years  before,^^  while  Samaria  had  met  the  same 

"  The  more  common  form  of  the  name  is  (m  il)  la-u-bi-'-di,  D.  33  ; 
N.  8 ;  S.  53,  but  in  C.  25;  A.  23  ;  K.  1349,  16  we  have  (m)  I-lu-bi-'-di. 
Since  Schrader,  Keilinschriften  und  A.  T./  4,  some  connection  with  the 
Hebrew  Yahweh  has  been  postulated  and  a  worship  of  that  deity  as- 
sumed for  N.  Syria,  cf.,  e.  g.,  G.  A.  Barton,  Semitic  Origins,  1902, 
284  n.  M.  Jastrow,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  1895,  222  ff.,  has  attacked  this 
identification  with  Yahweh  ;  according  to  him,  the  Assyrian  form  repre- 
sents an  original  IIu  yubidi  and  he  compares  the  use  of  El  with  the 
imperfect  in  Hebrew  names.  The  two  variant  forms  would  then  be  a 
correct  imperfect  and  a  learned  assimilation  of  the  scribe.  But  a  com- 
parison of  the  names  given  by  Johns,  Doomsday  Book,  40,  Zerba'idi, 
Zerba'di,  Sagil  bi'di,  Auba'di,  Adadi  bi'di,  Atar  bi'[di],  Ilu  ba[di], 
Hadad  ba'ad,  seems  to  show  a  lack  of  the  imperfect  preformative  in  the 
cases  where  we  have  a  well  known  god.  I  suspect  that  Ilubidi  is  simply  a 
(m  il)  la-u-bi-'-di  with  the  la  dropped  out  and  the  AN  then  read  as  ilu. 

"  Cf.  the  account  of  Haldia  in  chap.  H.  The  connection  frequently 
assumed  between  the  revolts  of  Hanunu  and  laubidi  is  possible  but  not 
proved.  How  C.  19  and  B.  23  is  a  proof  of  this,  Tiele,  Gesch.,  259, 
n.  3,  I  do  not  see.  Rogers,  History,  II.  155,  says  that  the  Assyrians 
called  Hanunu  king  of  Hamath.  This  is  evidently  due  to  misunder- 
standing of  Winckler,  S argon.  XIX.  n.  3. 

"  The  Assyrian  Arpadda,  the  modern  Tell  Arfad,  north  of  Aleppo. 
Assyr.  Chron.,  743-740.  A  little  later,  horses  came  from  Arpad,  91-5-9, 
136  =:H.  395,  a  letter  of  Nadinu. 

"The  Assyrian  Dimashqu.  Visited  July,  1904.  In  K.  542  =  H.  193, 
Harper,  Amer.  Jour.  Sem.  Lang.,  1897,  13  f.,  a  letter  from  Naid  ilu, 
and  therefore  from  our  reign  (cf.  K.  665  where  the  mentions  Sharru 
emur  anni,  eponym  of  712).  Shimpia,  the  Qupashi  official  of  Damascus, 
is  sent  to  the  king  according  to  orders.      It  may  be  that  Shimpia  was 


BABYLONIA   AND    SYRIA  49 

fate  but  three  years  before.^^  Cimirra  represented  the 
Phoenician  coast/^  and  Tyre  too  seems  to  have  taken  part 
in  this  revolt.^®    There  are  also  indications  that  Bar  Rekab 

the  head  of  the  Damascus  revolt  of  720.  More  probably,  it  was  in 
713  (Ashdod),  or  even  later.  His  first  occurrence  in  the  contract 
literature  is  707,  his  last,  if  it  is  the  same,  in  669.  We  are  therefore 
rather  to  place  him  late. 

''  Cf.  n.  9. 

"  The  place  was  known  as  Zamar  to  the  Egyptians,  W.  M.  Miiller, 
Asien  und  Europe,  1893,  187;  was  Cumuru  in  the  Amarna  Letters,  38^, 
in  spite  of  Winckler,  Mitth.  Vorderasiat.  Gesellsch.,  4,  27  ;  the  Cemari 
of  Gen.  10^*,  I  Chron.  i^° ;  the  Simyra  of  Greek  times,  Ptol.  V.  14.  3. 
The  modern  Sumra,  some  distance  inland,  preserves  the  name.  The 
ancient  site,  however,  was  more  probably  where  we  have  now  the 
Bedawin  town  of  Shakka,  near  the  mouth  of  the  Nahr  el  'Abrash.  We 
visited  the  latter  twice  in  September,  1904.  Both  times  we  con- 
tented ourselves  with  a  distant  view  of  Sumra.  This  I  regret  the 
more,  as  there  seems  to  be  no  record  of  a  visit  by  any  recent  traveller. 
The  only  person  who  seems  to  describe  the  site  from  actual  knowledge, 
— the  others  pick  out  a  site  and  then  identify  it  with  Simyra, — is 
Thomas  Shaw,  Travels,  1757,  269,  as  Mr.  Wrench  points  out  to  me. 
Some  natives  from  a  nearby  town  told  me  that  there  was  nothing  worth 
seeing  there.  They  pronounced  the  name  Samra,  the  first  a  being  long. 
K.  596  =  H.  190,  Delattre,  Proc.  Soc.  Bibl.  Arch.,  1901,  342  ff.,  states 
that  a  certain  Shepa  Ashur  has  gone  with  his  servants  from  Dur  Shar- 
rukin  to  Cimiri.  He  may  have  gone  to  become  governor,  or  he  may 
have  gone  for  cedars  for  the  new  palace. 

^*  C.  21.  For  discussion  see  chap  IV,  n.  62. — There  were  two  Tyres, 
one  on  the  mainland,  the  other  on  the  island.  For  Egyptian  times,  cf. 
Miiller,  op.  cit.,  189.  Here  Haven  Tyre,  the  island  city,  seems  to  be 
the  one  to  be  distinguished  from  Tyre  proper.  In  the  Assyrian  in- 
scriptions we  have  somewhat  the  same  conditions,  for  we  find  a  governor 
of  Tyre  in  648,  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  136,  the  name  being  changed  to  Kar 
Esar  haddon.  Yet  Island  Tyre  was  always  independent  under  kings. 
As  Palaetyrus,  the  name  still  lingered  in  classical  times,  although  the 
statements  of  Strabo,  XVI.  2.  24,  to  the  effect  that  it  was  thirty  stades 
from  the  island  city,  and  of  Pliny,  H.  N.  V.  19  (17).  76,  that  it  was 
nineteen  Roman  miles  in  circuit  must  apply  to  the  scattered  suburbs  all 
along  the  coast.  In  spite,  then,  of  certain  objectors,  e.  g.,  C.  Clermont- 
Ganneau,  Etudes  d'Archeologie  Orientale,  1880,  74,  we  have  a  right  to 
assume  a  Tyre  on  the  mainland  and  near  the  island  city.  Historic 
probability  also   leads  us  to   the  same   conclusion.      So  long  as   it  was 


50  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

of  Sam'al,  a  state  near  to  Arpad,  forgot  his  allegiance  to 

thought  that  the  Phoenicians  had  held  the  control  of  the  sea  for  in- 
definite ages,  the  situation  of  Tyre  on  an  island  need  not  be  wondered 
at.  But  now  we  know  that  Egyptian  and  Mycenaean  fleets  swept  the 
sea  to  a  decidedly  late  period,  certainly  to  a  period  later  by  much  than 
the  settlement  of  Phoenicians  along  the  seaboard.  We  also  have 
traditions  that  the  Phoenicians  were  immigrants  who  came  from  the 
east.  When  they  first  reached  the  seacoast,  being  still  landsmen,  and 
found  other  and  hostile,  or  at  least  piratical  fleets  controlling  the  sea, 
they  would  hardly  choose  an  exposed  island  for  their  first  home.  They 
would  rather  do  as  was  done  at  Tiryns,  Corinth,  Athens,  Troy,  and 
many  another  site  of  that  age,  choose  an  acropolis  near  enougn  to  the 
sea  for  trade  but  far  enough  away  and  defensible  enough  to  be  safe. 
Both  natural  conditions  and  the  meaning  of  the  name  Cor,  "  rock," 
make  us  look  for  such  an  acropolis  in  the  plain  opposite  the   island. 

There  is  only  one  position  which  corresponds  with  what  we  demand. 
This  is  the  isolated  "  rock  "  which  rises  abruptly  from  the  plain  about 
a  mile  and  a  half  SE.  by  E.  of  the  gate  of  Tyre.  It  was  probably  about 
two  thirds  of  a  mile  from  the  original  coast  line.  Tiryns,  with  which 
we  may  best  compare  it,  is  one  and  a  quarter  miles  away  from  the  coast, 
but  much  of  this  is  late  alluvial  filling.  The  "  rock  "  rises,  according  to 
Sepp,  quoted  Survey  of  Western  Palestine,  Memoirs,  1881,  I.  69,  forty  or 
fifty  feet  high,  and  this  I  think  not  far  wrong.  Tiryns  is  fifty-seven 
feet  high.  Sepp  makes  it  six  hundred  feet  in  circumference.  I  think 
this  is  too  small,  and  I  seem  to  be  confirmed  by  the  Saillardot-Renan 
map  of  Tyre  and  vicinity.  Tiryns  is  nearly  a  thousand  by  over  three 
hundred  feet,  but  this  space  is  divided  into  three  terraces  on  which  are 
three  separate  citadels.  Kitchener,  Survey,  50,  estimates  the  present 
population  at  about  thirty,  and  with  this  I  agree.  This  space  is  certainly 
small  for  so  famous  a  city  as  Tyre.  But  was  the  earliest  Tyre  so  very 
large?  If  Tiryns,  when  a  flourishing  Mycenaean  city,  could  keep  its 
main  buildings  on  so  small  a  site,  the  much  less  important  Tyre  could 
surely  hold  our  situation.  This  rock  could  easily  accommodate  several 
hundred  persons,  and  the  early  village  would  hardly  have  more.  As 
the  city  grew,  the  new  houses  would  be  grouped  around  the  rock  but  the 
people  would  retire  to  its  citadel  when  the  enemy  came. 

It  is  the  usual  fate  of  an  acropolis  to  become  the  home  of  the  gods 
after  peace  has  allowed  its  citizens  to  descend  to  the  more  convenient 
plain.  This  seems  to  have  happened  in  the  case  of  old  Tyre,  for  to-day 
the  most  prominent  edifice  on  the  rock  is  the  shrine  of  the  Muslim  saint, 
Nebi  Ma'shuk,   and  his  wife,  whose  name,  the  "  Beloved,"   would   con- 


BABYLONIA   AND    SYRIA  51 

Assyria, — perhaps  his  boasted  love  to  Tiglath  Pileser^®  did 
not  extend  to  the  supplanter  of  his  dynasty, — and  joined 
the  coaHtion.-^ 

The  allies  do  not  seem  to  have  acted  in  concert, — it  would 

nect  him  with  Tammuz-Adonis,  the  old  Phoenician  god,  even  did  not 
another  trace  of  his  worship  exist  in  the  feast  the  Tyrians  still  celebrate 
in  his  honor,  in  July,  the  month  which  in  antiquity  bore  the  name  of 
Tammuz.      Sepp,  /.  c. 

When  the  Phoenicians  gained  control  of  the  sea,  the  inland  site 
was  found  inconvenient,  especially  since  a  fine  site  for  a  port  existed 
among  the  islands  just  off  the  coast.  An  analogous  situation  was 
faced  by  Athens  at  the  close  of  the  Persian  Wars.  Before  that,  the 
acropolis  and  the  region  directly  around  it  was  the  city  par  excellence. 
After  that  time,  Athens  held  control  of  the  sea,  the  Piraeus  was  rebuilt 
and  became  of  even  greater  importance.  Themistocles,  who  better 
than  any  other  man  in  antiquity  understood  the  meaning  of  "  sea 
power,"  made  no  attempt  to  conceal  the  fact  that  he  considered  the 
Piraeus  the  more  important  of  the  two  and  often  said  that,  if  the 
Athenians  ever  were  worsted  on  land,  they  should  go  to  the  Pireaus 
and  use  that  as  a  base  for  a  warfare  on  sea.  Thuc.  I.  93.  What 
Themistocles  saw,  but  could  not  persuade  the  Athenians  to  do  completely, 
the  less  sentimental  Tyrians  did.  The  island  city  became  the  more  im- 
portant, the  shrines  and  public  buildings  were  collected  together  in  a 
situation  which  for  more  than  a  thousand  years  proved  impregnable, 
and  the  old  city,  probably  actually  increased  in  numbers,  became  only 
a  suburb.  It  is  quite  possible  that  this  transfer  of  the  main  city  to 
the  island  was  caused  by  Hiram,  for  we  are  told  that  he  connected  the 
islands,  built  temples  and  the  great  square,  Menander  in  Josephus. 

"  The  Bar  Rekab  inscription,  in  F.  von  Luschan,  Ausgrabungen  in 
Sendschirli,  1893,  79. 

^*'  Sam'al,  which  plays  so  large  a  part  in  earlier  times,  suddenly  dis- 
appears. Prism  B.  is  the  only  Sargon  document  which  refers  to  it 
and  the  reference  there  must  be  placed  in  720  cf.  chap.  I.  n.  47.  If  it 
is  allowable  to  connect  the  "my  governor"  of  K.  1672.  I.  3  with  the 
"  city  Samalla  "  of  4,  we  may  assume  that  Sam'al  already  had  a  gov- 
ernor, Winckler,  Forsch.,  I.  22;  II.  y:^.  At  any  rate,  in  681  we  have 
a  governor  of  Sam'al  as  eponym.  Winckler,  Keilinschr.  und  Alte  Test.^ 
67  f.  places  here  the  reference  to  laudu  in  N.  8.  After  much  hesitation, 
I  am  a  little  more  inclined  to  attribute  it  to  Judah. — Maspero,  Empires, 
283,  adds  Bit  Agusi  to  the  list  of  revolted  states.  I  do  not  know  his 
authority. 


52  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

have  been  too  much  to  expect  of  a  Syrian  confederation, — or 
perhaps  Sargon  was  too  quick  for  them.  laubidi  took  up 
his  position  at  Qarqar,^^  to  the  north  of  Hamath,  to  meet  the 
advancing  Assyrians.  Once  before,  854,  the  Syrians  had 
met  Assyrians  on  this  field  and  had  defeated  them  and 
saved  Syria  for  the  time.-^  Now  they  were  in  turn  defeated, 
and  laubidi  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  victors.  This  was  the 
first  success  of  the  reign,  and  it  needed  to  be  emphasized. 
A  horrible  punishment,  only  too  common,  was  decreed  for 
the  unfortunate  laubidi.  He  was  carried  to  Assyria  and 
flayed  alive.  Later,  a  vivid  bas-relief  was  set  up  on  the 
walls  of  the  new  capital,  a  warning  against  revolt  to  the 

-^  For  the  name  Qarqara  Schrader,  Keilinschr.  und  d.  Alte  Test.,^  84, 
compares  the  Qarqor  of  Jud.  8^"  and  the  Karkor  of  Eusebius,  Onom. 
But  the  edition  of  Klostermann,  116,  has  Karkaria  as  the  place  existing 
in  the  days  of  Eusebius.  The  actual  location  of  Qarqar  is  uncertain. 
Maspero,  Empires,  70,  n.*  makes  it  Qala'at  el  Mudiq,  the  ancient 
Apamea  of  Lebanon,  Ptol.  V.  14.  15. — Harper,  Code  of  Hammurabi, 
1904,  7,  and  cf.  map,  reads  (al)  IM.KI  as  Karkar,  Code  III.  61  and 
makes  it  the  Syrian  city.  He  also  finds  here  the  Syrian  Aleppo.  But 
this  Hallab  =  ZA.RI.UNU.KI  is  clearly  a  Babylonian  city,  as  is  shown 
by  the  Hammurabi  inscription,  King  V,  and  by  the  geographical  lists 
where  the  names  occur  along  with  cities  which  are  certainly  Babylonian. 
Qarqar  is  called  al  naramishu,  his  "  beloved  city  "  in  D.  34.  This  can 
hardly  mean  his  capital.  Possibly  it  means  his  birthplace.  We 
should  note  that  Qarqar  is  in  his  ''  country "  of  Hamath,  mat  being 
regularly  used  before  Hamath,  This  use  of  Hamath  is  also  frequent 
in  the  Bible,  e.  g.,  Riblah  is,  according  to  II  Kings  23^  in  the  land  of 
Hamath.  A  hitherto  unnoticed  case  of  such  use  is  to  be  seen  in  the 
expression  usually  translated  "  entrance  of  Hamath "  which  occurs  in 
the  delimination  of  the  ideal  boundaries  of  the  Holy  Land.  The  ex- 
planation current  is  not  without  difficulties,  cf.  e.  g.,  G.  B.  Gray,  Num- 
bers, 1903,  140.  The  Septuagint  on  Jud.  3^  Labo  Emath,  gives  the  clue. 
Libo  is  not  a  verbal  form  but  a  proper  noun,  the  Libo  of  the  Antonine 
Itinerary,  198.  3,  and  the  modern  Lebweh,  which  we  visited  July, 
1904. — K.  6674  =  H.  225,  Delattre,  Proc.  Soc.  Bibl.  Arch.,  1900,  269, 
a  letter  from  Uhati  reads  "  peace  to  the  desert  of  the  land  of  Hamate." 

"  Shalmaneser  II,  Monolith,  II.  87  ff. 


BABYLONIA   AND    SYRIA  53 

petty  princes  who  brought  their  tribute  to  Dur  Sharrukin.^^ 
After  the  battle,  Qarqar  was  taken  and  burned  and 
Hamath,  which  seems  to  have  lain  not  far  off,  was  also 
captured,  its  low-lying  position  giving  little  opportunity  for 
defense.  Of  its  inhabitants  many  were  killed,  others  were 
made  captive,  while  the  flower  of  the  troops,  two  hundred 
charioteers  and  six  hundred  horsemen,  was  added  to  the 
standing  army  which  Sargon  was  now  forming  to  take  the 
place  of  the  old  feudal  levy.^*  The  position  of  Hamath  on 
the  great  road  from  the  north  to  Egypt  was  important,  as 
its  relation  to  the  modern  railway  shows.  To  secure  it,  a 
colony  of  six  thousand  three  hundred  native  Assyrians  was 
settled  here,  and  an  Assyrian  governor  was  placed  over 
them.^^  The  site  of  this  city  is  now  represented,  no  doubt, 
by  the  big  bare  mound  which  stands  in  the  center  of  the 
modern  town,  and  here,  if  we  should  excavate,  we  should 
probably  find  not  only  the  relics  of  an  earlier  Hittite  people, 
but  even  cuneiform  documents  of  the  sort  already  found  in 
the  mounds  of  Palestine.^® 

The  capture  of  Hamath  seems  to  have  ended  the  revolt 

^^  Botta,  Ninive,  II.  pi.  120;  also  in  Maspero,  op.  cit.,  235. 

^*  Cf.  under  the  last  chapter, 

^A.  23  if.;  D.  35  f.;  especially  S.I.  51  ff.  which  here  adds  much  new 
matter. 

^®  In  all  Syria,  I  have  not  seen  a  mound  which  so  struck  me  as  worth 
excavating.  It  is  a  splendid  big  tell,  in  the  middle  of  the  town  and 
at  present  absolutely  bare.  The  railroad  has  now  reached  Hama,  and 
in  the  growth  which  is  likely  to  follow  the  mound  will  probably  be 
covered  with  buildings.  When  we  remember  that  already  five  Hittite 
inscriptions  have  been  found  at  Hama,  the  outlook  for  results  is 
promising.  I  do  not  think  any  trouble  would  need  be  feared.  The 
accounts  of  the  fanaticism  of  the  people  are  much  exaggerated.  We 
visited  without  special  escort  and  photographed  the  main  mosque  and 
the  one  where  Abul  feda  is  buried. 


54  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

in  the  north,  and  the  other  cities  submitted.^^  Then  he 
moved  south  to  attack  Hanunu  of  Gaza,-®  around  whom 
the  revolt  in  the  south  centered.  Gaza  held  one  of  the  most 
important  positions  in  the  ancient  world.  As  the  last  Syrian 
city  towards  Egypt  on  the  great  Syro-Egyptian  trade  route, 
and  as  the  seaport  of  the  Arabian  caravan  road,  its  posses- 
sion was  no  less  valuable  from  the  commercial  than  from 
the  military  standpoint.  This  was  thoroughly  understood 
in  Egypt  where  the  holding  of  advance  lines  on  Syrian  soil 
has  always  been  a  fundamental  part  of  the  national  policy. 
As  soon  as  the  Ethiopian  rulers  began  to  secure  Lower 
Egypt,  it  was  felt  that  an  advance  on  Syria  was  to  be  part 
of  the  general  prqgram.  Already,  in  the  time  of  Tiglath 
Pileser,  the  first  attempt  had  been  made  and  Hanunu  had 
been  won  over.  The  attempt  failed,  and  Hanunu  was  forced 
to  flee  to  Egypt.  During  the  weaker  reign  of  Shalmaneser 
he  returned,  deposed  the  Assyrian  protege  Idibi'il,  and  re- 
gained his  throne.    In  this  he  was  helped  by  a  certain  Sibu 

^  The  sneering  question,  "  where  are  the  gods  of  Hamath  and  of 
Arpad?"  II  Kings  i8**,  cf.  19*',  seems  to  refer  to  this  event.  What- 
ever its  date,  the  source  was  good.  Amos  6^  may  be  a  possible  inter- 
polation of  this  date,  Bickell,  in  Schrader,  Keilinschr.  und  d.  Alte  Test.,' 
445  n.  The  part  of  the  Annals  which  probably  told  of  the  conquest 
of  the  minor  states  is  lost. 

^  Hanunu  is  clearly  the  same  name  as  Hanun  king  of  Ammon,  II 
Sam.,  10^  ff.;  II  Chron.  19-  ff.;  and  is  identical  with  the  well-known 
Carthaginian  Hanno.  Johns,  Amer.  Jour.  Sem.  Lang.,  1902,  249,  would 
apply  here  his  rule  that  names  in  -anu  are  derived  from  cities  and  dis- 
covers a  city  Hana  here.  But  it  merely  means  "  the  favored  one." 
Is  it  possible  that  we  have  a  present-day  remembrance  of  the  old  hero 
in  the  Muslim  saint,  Nebi  Hanun,  who  lives  at  Bet  Hanun,  a  little 
mud  village  surrounded  by  cactus  hedges  on  the  open  plain  a  short 
distance  northeast  of  Gaza?  We  visited  and  photographed  the  place 
in  January,  1905. 

The  modern  Ghazzeh  still  preserves  the  ancient  form  Ghazzat,  as  it 
occurs  in  the  South  Arabian  inscription,  Glaser  1083,  in  Glaser,  Die 
Abessinier  in  Arabien  und  Afrika,  1895,  75-      The  Hebrew  'Azzeh  was 


BABYLONIA    AND    SYRIA  55 

who  was  enabled  by  his  success  in  Gaza  to  produce  the 
rebelHon  of  Hoshea  of  Israel.-® 

Shalmaneser  secured  the  fall  of  Samaria,  but  was  put  out 
of  the  way  before  he  could  attack  Gaza,  and  Sargon  now 
took  up  his  work.  What  happened  when  he  reached  Gaza 
is  not  clear,  but  he  seems  to  have  fought  a  battle  before  its 
gates. ^*^  The  city  was  captured  and  the  allies  fell  back 
toward  Egypt,  perhaps  toward  Rhinocolura,  on  the  "  Brook  " 
of  Egypt,  where  a  frontier  post  seems  always  to  have  been 
held.     Sibu  summoned  his  tartan,  or  lieutenant,  to  come  to 

also  pronounced  Ghazzeh,  as  the  Greek  Gaza  shows.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  Assyrians  used  the  form  Hazite,  H  being  their  usual  transliteration 
of  Ghain.  The  older  city  was  undoubtedly  near  the  present  harbor 
or  Mineh,  the  classical  Maiuma.  In  spite  of  the  steamers,  there  is 
still  a  brisk  land  trade  with  Egypt,  and  traces  of  Egyptian  influence 
are  much  more  marked  than  in  any  other  part  of  Syria.  There  is 
no  real  harbor,  but  several  tramp  steamers  lie  off  the  coast  to  take  on 
grain  during  harvest.      Visited  in  January,  1905. 

^  The  Hebrew  form  So  is  admittedly  incorrect.  The  pointing  is  gen- 
erally changed  to  Sewe.  Eleven  Greek  MSS.  quoted  by  Holmes  and 
Parsons  have  Soba,  Zoba,  Somba  with  a  b.  The  relation  of  these 
MSS.  is  not  clear,  but  three  seem  to  be  Hesychian,  that  is,  these  read- 
ings go  back  to  an  Egyptian  source.  It  is  tempting  to  assume  that 
this  form  actually  goes  back  to  some  extra  canonical  source  which 
knew  of  a  Sibu,  but  it  is  perhaps  more  probable  that  in  the  b  we  have 
only  a  later  transliteration  oi  a.  v  sound. — It  may  be  only  a  coincidence 
that  Sibu  and  Shabaka  look  somewhat  alike,  but  I  am  not  quite  sure  yet. 
The  change  in  the  sibilants  would  make  no  trouble  and  H.  Brugsch, 
History  of  Egypt,  1879,  H.  273,  followed  by  W.  M.  F.  Petrie,  History 
of  Egypt,  III.  1 90s,  284,  believes  that  ka  is  a  postfixed  article.  Stein- 
dortf,  Beitr.  zur  Assyr.,  I.  342,  denies  the  force  of  this,  pointing  oul 
that  ki  is  rather  the  Dat.-Acc.  ending.  I  know  nothing  of  Nubian 
and  therefore  have  no  right  to  an  opinion  on  this  question.  A  more 
serious  objection  to  the  identification  is  the  fact  that  Shabaku  is 
actually  found  in  Ashur  bani  pal.   Ras.   Cyl.,   II.   22. 

"^  A.  27  has  — ]  kun  ma.  This  may  be  restored  Abiktushunu  ash- 
ktinma,  "their  destruction  I  accomplished,"  Winckler,  Sargon,  XIX, 
n.  7,  or  itti  Piru  shar  Muguri  kidra  ishkunma,  "  he  made  alliance  with 
Piru,  king  of  Egypt,"  Winckler,  Untersuch.,  93.     I  prefer  the  former. 


56  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

his  aid,  and  the  two  armies  met  at  Rapihu,  where  now  the 
boundary  between  Egypt  and  Syria  is  marked  and  where 
later  Lagidse  and  Seleucidae  contested  the  control  of  South- 
ern Syria.^^  Sibu  fled  "  as  a  shepherd  deprived  of  his 
flock,"  so  Sargon  boasts,  and  Syria  knew  his  intrigues  no 
more.  Hanunu  was  less  fortunate,  but  was  captured  and 
taken  to  the  city  of  Ashur  with  nearly  ten  thousand  of  his 
men.  Rapihu,^^  probably  at  that  time  only  a  fortified  camp, 
was  destroyed,  but  Gaza,^^  perhaps  as  a  reward  for  treachery, 
was  spared.^*  Under  the  direct  control  of  the  crown,  it 
lasted  on  and  flourished  through  Assyrian,  Babylonian,  and 
Persian  times  until  Alexander,  by  his  destruction  of  Tyre, 
showed  his  hostility  to  Syrian  commerce.  Then  first  Gaza 
resisted  the  powers  that  be  and  met  its  fate. 

'^  Rapihu  is  the  Raphia  where  Ptolemy  IV  defeated  Antiochus  the 
Great  in  217,  Polyb.  V.  82  ff.,  cf.  for  a  good  account  of  the  battle, 
J.  P.  Mahaffy,  Hermathena,  X,  140  if.  References  to  the  mediaeval 
geographers  who  use  the  form  Rafh,  G.  Le  Strange,  Palestine  under  the 
Moslems,  1890,  517.  We  visited  the  modern  Tell  and  Bir  Refah  in 
February,  1905.  The  tell,  which  is  rapidly  being  covered  with  sand, 
is  a  fine  one  and  would  merit  excavation. — The  Display  inscription 
makes  Sibu  himself  tartan.  I  prefer  the  more  accurate  Annals  where, 
though  mutilated,  we  seem  to  be  led  to  take  the  "  his  "  in  "  his  tartan  " 
to  refer  to  Sibu. 

«2A.  27  if.',  D.  25  f.]  XIV.  16  /.;  P.  IV.  38  ^.— A  deportation  of 
gods  can  hardly  be  assumed  with  Cheyne,  Expos.  Times,  June,  1899, 
art.  Gaza.  Ency.  Bibl.,  from  II  Kings  17'*;  18^*;  19";  Isaiah  37^^  since 
the  emendation  he  proposes  *ZH  (Gaza)  for  'WH  (Aveh),  though  easy, 
is  unlikely.  K.  1349  does  not  mention  the  Gaza  expedition.  Winckler, 
Keilinschr.  und  d.  Alte  Test.^  67,  therefore,  would  not  accept  the  date  of 
the  Annals,  Prism  B.,  however,  has  a  passage  about  Muguri  and  Martu 
(Syria)  which  seems  to  belong  to  year  II.  The  statement  that  Hanunu 
was  carried  to  Ashur  may  indicate  that  only  a  general  was  in  charge. 

^'  We  may  surmise  this  from  later  conditions. 

"*  A  discussion  of  this  campaign  demands  a  consideration  of  the 
MuQri  question  which,  since  first  laid  down  by  Winckler  in  his 
Forschungen  and  more  fully  in  the  Mitth.  V order asiat.  GeselL,  1898, 
I,   has   become   what   is  perhaps   the   most   vexing  problem   in   Oriental 


BABYLONIA   AND   SYRIA  57 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  Sargon  did  not  attempt  to 
follow  up  his  advantages  and  attack  Egypt  or  even  Rhino- 
colura.  Perhaps  his  forces  had  already  suffered  severely, 
or  perhaps  he  felt  that  the  conquest  of  Egypt  was  impos- 
sible, until  he  had  secured  a  firmer  hold  in  Syria.     For  the 

History.  Briefly  stated,  the  problem  is  as  follows.  Are  all  the 
references  in  the  Bible  to  Migraim  and  to  Mugri  in  the  Assyrian  in- 
scriptions to  be  assigned  to  Egypt,  or  is  some  other  country  or  countries 
to  be  here  considered? 

The  present  note  cannot  be,  and  does  not  pretend  to  be,  an  adequate 
study  of  this  question.  What  is  here  aimed  at  is  a  discussion  of  the 
Assyrian  sources  with  special  reference  to  the  question  as  to  the  exis- 
tence of  a  kingdom  of  Mugri.  More  general  matters  will  be  touched 
upon  only  where  necessary  for  clearness. 

One  fact  gives  me  more  confidence  in  undertaking  this  work.  For 
the  last  three  years,  the  members  of  the  Semitic  Department  at  Cornell 
University  have  been  engaged  in  a  study  of  the  history  of  the  Negeb 
or  South  Country,  the  region  to  the  south  of  Judah.  Two  years  ago, 
these  members  went  to  Syria  as  students  in  the  American  School  for 
Oriental  Study  at  Jerusalem,  under  Professor  Schmidt's  directorship. 
Three  expeditions  were  made  to  the  Negeb.  All  the  sites  of  any 
special  importance  were  visited.  During  these  trips,  important  results 
from  an  archaeological  and  topographical  standpoint  were  secured,  and 
Professor  Schmidt  will  soon  issue  a  work  on  the  historical  geography 
of  that  region.  During  these  trips,  the  pertinent  literature  was  taken 
along  and  studied  on  the  spot.  The  discussions  with  Professor  Schmidt 
and  Messrs.  Charles  and  Wrench,  both  then  and  later,  have  been  of 
great  value  and  are  thankfully  acknowledged,  but  the  ideas  here  given 
are  primarily  the  results  of  the  author's  own  study  in  his  own  special 
field,  and  the  others  should  not  be  held  responsible  for  these  views. 
Other  phases  will  be  dealt  with  by  them  later. 

It  should  be  noted  that  several  distinct  questions  are  here  involved, 
and  much  of  the  confusion  of  thought  on  this  subject  seems  due  to  a 
confusion  of  issues.  These  questions  are  as  follows.  First,  were 
derivations  from  the  root  MCR  used  as  the  proper  names  of  countries 
or  regions  other  than  Egypt?  Second,  was  one  of  these  names  used 
in  connection  with  the  Negeb,  in  other  words,  are  some  of  the  references 
in  the  Bible  to  Migraim  and  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  to  Mugri 
to  be  referred  rather  to  the  Negeb  than  to  Egypt?  It  should  be  noted 
that  an  answer  to  this  question  is  a  matter  of  fact  pure  and  simple 
and  that  an  affirmative  reply  does  not  commit  one  to  any  theory  as  to 


58  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

next  few  years  much  attention  was  devoted  to  settlement  of 
Syrian  affairs.    Those  cities  which  were  not  directly  impli- 

how  the  same  name  came  to  be  applied  to  both  the  Negeb  and  to  Egypt. 
Nor  does  an  affirmative  of  necessity  demand  a  like  answer  to  the  third 
question,  "  Does  the  acceptance  of  the  term  Mugri-Migraim  as  applied 
to  the  Negeb  likewise  require  the  acceptance  of  a  theory  that  this  Negeb 
Mugri  was  a  kingdom  important  enough  to  take  the  place  of  Egypt 
for  several  centuries  in  contemporaneous  thought  ?  " 

These  theories  and  the  questions  they  raise  cannot  be  brushed  aside 
as  mere  foolishness,  as  some  seem  inclined  to  do.  The  men  who 
propose  them  have  been  the  leaders  in  showing  the  importance  of  the 
South  Arabian  civilization  and  its  possible  influence  on  the  near-by 
nations,  while  Winckler,  the  original  author,  is  more  at  home  in  Assyrian 
than  in  anything  else,  wide  as  his  interests  are.  A  fair  consideration 
of  the  theories  is  therefore  demanded.  Professor  Winckler  makes 
his  main  claim  for  support  on  the  Assyrian  data.  Consideration  of 
authorities  cannot  influence  us.  If,  as  Professor  Winckler  claims, 
Jensen  is  the  only  Assyriologist  who  openly  opposes  the  theory,  there 
is  every  reason  to  suppose  that  a  large  and  influential  body  of  Assyri- 
ologists  have  not  written  on  the  subject,  because  they  do  not  consider 
the  question  probable  enough  for  discussion.  The  Egyptologists  are, 
it  should  be  noted,  strongly  opposed  to  it,  as  is  but  natural.  Certainly 
the  evidence  from  Egyptian  sources  should  be  considered,  and  it  is  a 
pity  that  no  Egyptologist  has  thought  the  question  worth  a  thorough 
discussion  from  his  standpoint.  We  also  notice  that  some  of  the 
leaders  in  Palestinian  topography  are  not  followers  of  Winckler.  The 
small  number  of  the  authorities  we  would  expect  to  be  interested  who 
actually  have  thought  this  question  worthy  of  even  unfavorable  com- 
ment is  enough  to  make  us  pause,  however  enthusiastic  we  may  be. 

To  the  first  question,  "  Can  the  root  MCR  be  used  as  the  proper 
name  for  a  boundary  province  ?  "  affirmative  answer  must  be  given.  The 
noun  migir  is  common  in  Assyrian,  compare  Muss-Arnolt.  A  moun- 
tain MuQur  was  near  Dur  Sharrukin,  Cylinder  44.  Other  references  to 
Mugur  in  north  Syria  are  possible.  Is  the  same  true  of  Migraim  in 
the  Biblical  writings?  This  is  more  doubtful.  Leaving  aside  the 
question  of  the  Negeb  Mugri,  we  have  I  Kings  10^  and  II  Kings  7' 
cited  as  proof  texts  for  a  northern  Mugri.  In  the  former,  it  is  per- 
fectly natural  for  Solomon  to  take  horses  from  the  Egyptians  to  the 
south  of  him  and  to  sell  them  to  the  Hittites  and  Aramaeans  to  the 
north.  To  suppose,  with  Winckler,  that  he  brought  them, — presumably 
by  the  sea  the  control  of  which  he  never  had, — from  Que  (Cilicia), 
and   the    Cappadocian   Mugri,    far   to   the  north,   and  sold   them   to   the 


BABYLONIA   AND    SYRIA  59 

cated  in  the  revolts  were  allowed  to  retain  their  autonomy 
under  the  local  kings.     Those  which  were,  Samal  Cimirra, 

kindred  Hittites  and  the  Aramaeans,  again  to  the  north,  is  to  suppose 
that  trade  does  not  follow  natural  lines.  This  line  is  certainly  un- 
natural, and  a  reason  for  this  should  be  given.  Nothing  in  the  political 
or  social  situation  justifies  such  an  idea.  As  for  the  latter,  would  not 
the  terror  of  the  Aramaeans  have  been  all  the  greater,  if  they  feared 
they  were  being  caught  in  a  trap  between  the  armies  of  the  south  and 
of  the  north  ?  And  when  could  a  better  time  for  hiring  Egyptian 
kings  or  princes  be  found  than  just  when  the  dynasty  which,  from 
control  of  the  camp  of  the  mercenaries  had  gone  to  control  of  the 
kingdom,  was  breaking  up,  and  all  the  petty  Delta  rulers  were  trying 
to  follow  suit. 

If,  however,  we  cannot  allow  a  Migraim  other  than  the  Migraim 
which  may  be  Egypt  or  the  Negeb,  perhaps  we  may  in  the  case  of  the 
South  Arabian  references.  In  Gl.  1155,  1183,  1302,  we  have  references 
to  a  Migran  which  Winckler  has  naturally  taken  to  be  his  Negeb  Mugri. 
But  can  we  accept  this  identification?  In  Gl.  1183,  we  have  Migran 
Ma'in,  "  the  boundary  land  of  Ma'in."  This  seems  to  indicate  that 
we  have  to  do  with  the  name  of  a  mark  which  has  grown  up  in 
Minaean  territory  independently  and  therefore  has  no  necessary,  per- 
haps better,  has  no  probable  connection  with  Egyptian  territory.  Note 
that  it  is  Migran,  not  Migr,  "  the  mark  "  par  excellence,  as  the  use  of 
the  article  shows.  It  is  in  marked  contrast  to  this  that  in  the  late 
Minaean  sarcophagus  inscription  of  Gizeh,  we  have  Migr  used  of  Egypt 
without  the  article.  It  would  then  seem  that  these  two  forms  represent 
two  independent  developments.  Nor  do  we  in  the  Assyrian  inscriptions 
have  any  form  which  seems  to  point  to  use  of  final  nun.  If  this 
Migran  really  was  the  boundary  mark  of  Ma'in,  we  should  naturally 
place  it  somewhere  to  the  north  where  Minaean  control  seems  to  be 
proved.  A  good  site  would  be  the  region  around  El  Oela  where 
Doughty  found  two  Minaean  inscriptions  and  which  we  must  place  near 
the  most  northern  part  where  definite  Minaean  control  can  be  assumed. 
At  any  rate,  we  have  no  right  to  assume  that  the  Migran  of  the 
South  Arabian  inscriptions  is  a  Negeb  Mugri,  or  is  Egypt,  without 
consideration  of  these  points. 

As  regards  the  second  question,  an  affirmative  answer  is  again  re- 
quired. In  many  Biblical  passages,  as  already  pointed  out  by  Winckler 
and  Cheyne,  Migraim  is  used  for  a  region  to  the  east  and  north  of 
the  Isthmus  of  Suez  and  therefore  outside  of  Egypt  proper.  What 
does  this  fact  prove  as  to  political  history?  Absolutely  nothing, 
although  it  may  suggest  certain  interesting  questions.      That  a  Migrite 


60  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

Damascus,  the  mainland  Tyre,  and  Samaria,  soon  appear 
with  Assyrian  governors,  and  it  is  probable  that  this  took 

is  an  inhabitant  of  the  Negeb  does  not  prove  that  he  is  subject  to 
Egypt,  that  his  Negeb  is  independent,  or  anything  of  the  sort.  The 
United  States  government  officially  calls  itself  "  American "  yet  there 
is  no  reason  for  assuming  that  an  "  American "  is  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States,  is  a  member  of  an  independent  republic,  or  is  not  loyal 
to  King  Edward  VII.  Nor  does  the  fact  that  an  immigrant  inspector 
returns  a  man  as  a  "  Turk "  prove  that  he  is  not  a  Christian  Syrian 
from  the  Lebanon.  At  the  same  time,  some  sort  of  connection  of  the 
terms  at  some  time  is  rendered  probable,  and  the  fact  that  the  adjoining 
countries  of  Egypt  and  the  Negeb  bore  similar  names  would  prove  some 
sort  of  connection,  even  if  we  did  not  know  that,  at  a  time  earlier  than 
any  of  our  references  to  a  Negeb  Mugri,  Egypt  held  more  or  less 
secure  control  of  the  Negeb.  We  should  then  suppose  that  Egypt 
had  caused  its  name  to  be  extended  over  the  lands  conquered.  But 
Mugri  is  unfortunately  not  the  native  name  of  Egypt  and  is  rather  a 
Semitic  form.  What  then  was  its  origin  and  how  did  it  come  to  be 
used  by  natives  of  Egypt  themselves?  Answers  that  are  satisfactory 
are  not  forthcoming.  Any  attempt  to  answer  must  note  that  already 
in  the  Amarna  tablets  the  king  of  Egypt  acknowledged  the  title  "  king 
of  Migri,"  even  when  communicating  with  the  kings  of  Assyria  and 
Babylonia.  The  antiquity  of  the  application  of  the  term  to  Egypt  is 
therefore  considerable. 

But,  as  already  stated,  affirmative  answers  to  the  first  two  questions 
do  not  of  necessity  demand  an  affirmative  answer  to  the  third,  and 
indeed  I  would  return  a  decided  negative  to  the  question.  Was  there 
during  the  later  Assyrian  period  a  kingdom  of  Mugri  in  the  Negeb  which 
was  not  only  independent  but  so  powerful  that  it  for  some  centuries 
took  the  place  of  Egypt  as  the  great  antagonist  of  Assyria  in  the  con- 
test for  Syria?  The  mere  supposition  is  difficult  to  make  that  two 
kingdoms  of  exactly  similar  names  should  exist  side  by  side  (Winckler's 
attempts  to  distinguish  between  Mugri  and  Migri  are  admitted  failures), 
one  a  great  power  which  has  retained  its  essential  identity  from  the 
dawn  of  history  to  the  present  day  and  has  often  taken  its  place  as 
one  of  the  great  world  powers,  the  other  springing  suddenly  out  of 
obscurity,  taking  the  place  of  the  other,  holding  its  position  in  the 
face  of  the  greatest  empire  the  world  had  yet  seen,  then  suddenly  once 
more  disappearing  into  a  like  obscurity  while  as  suddenly  Egypt  once 
more  comes  into  conflict  with  Assyria.  We  are  naturally  prejudiced 
against  such  a  theory  and,  as  we  advance,  new  objections  appear. 


BABYLONIA    AND    SYRIA  6 1 

The  Negeb  Mugri  kingdom,  to  accept  the  conjectures  of  Winckler, 
lasted  about  as  long  a  time  and  was  nearly  as  important  as  the  king- 
dom of  Haldia  which  succeeded  in  holding  Armenia  against  the  con- 
stant attacks  of  the  Assyrians.  Armenia  has  been  continuously  oc- 
cupied since  and  there  has  been  ample  opportunity  for  destruction  of 
monuments,  yet  we  have  several  hundred  inscriptions  in  the  Haldian 
language  and  important  architectural  remains.  The  Negeb  has  been 
a  desert  for  at  the  very  least  half  the  time  since  the  Negeb  Mugri  is 
supposed  to  have  existed.  Where  are  the  monuments?  There  are, 
to  be  sure,  fine  ruins  in  the  Negeb,  but  they  are  all  Roman  and  mostly 
Christian  at  that.  This  is  clearly  proved  by  the  late  type  of  the 
archaeology  and  the  late  dates  of  the  inscriptions.  Another  noticeable 
feature  is  that  the  towns  are  generally  built  in  the  plain,  thus  showing 
a  period  of  peace.  We  are  probably  to  place  the  full  civilization  of 
this  region  only  in  the  second  century  A.  D.  Much  stronger  are  two 
negative  facts.  One  is  the  absence  of  pre-Roman  pottery.  At  every 
site,  we  eagerly  searched  for  such,  but  among  the  great  heaps  only 
Roman  types  were  found.  The  other  fact  is  the  absence  of  tells,  or 
artificial  mounds,  in  the  Negeb  region  proper.  To  be  sure,  we  have  a 
fine  tell  at  Raphia,  but  this  is  on  the  direct  road  to  Egypt  and  in  part 
is  surely  Graeco-Roman.  In  the  days  of  the  kingdom  of  Judah,  that 
is  in  the  days  when  the  Mugri  kingdom  is  supposed  to  have  flourished, 
the  boundary  was  from  Geba  to  Beersheba,  cf.  "  Dan  to  Beersheba." 
Beersheba  would  appear  to  have  been  the  southern  boundary  of  civil- 
ization to  the  Israelites  and  this  is  confirmed  by  the  fact  that,  while 
along  this  border  and  to  the  north  there  is  a  good  plenty  of  tells,  to 
the  south,  in  the  Negeb  proper,  there  is  an  utter  absence  of  such 
mounds,  the  only  example  being  an  insignificant  one  in  the  Wadi  el 
*Ain.  No  doubt  the  Negeb  was  inhabited  before  Roman  times  and 
perhaps  even  settled,  as  the  Joshua  lists  indicate,  but  a  civilization 
which,  on  the  broad  fertile  plains  which  make  up  half  the  Negeb  could 
not  leave  tells  or  pottery  deposits,  may  safely  be  assumed  not  to  have 
been  important  enough  to  have  taken  the  place  of  Egypt  in  general 
history   for  several   centuries. 

If  strong  negative  objections  can  be  gained  from  lack  of  remains 
of  a  real  civilization,  even  stronger  are  those  connected  with  his- 
torical geography.  Where  the  topography  is  so  all  compelling  as  in 
Syria,  history  may  be  expected  to,  and  does,  repeat  itself  very  closely. 
In  studying  the  operations  of  the  various  armies,  ancient  and  modern, 
one  is  amazed  to  see  how  alike  these  operations  are  and  how  the 
details  of  one  account  may  be  used  to  supplement  the  gaps  of  another. 
It  is  therefore  evidence  of  no  small  value  when  we  can  show  that,  age 
after  age,   Egypt  has  been  in  the  position  of  a   fortified   camp,   always 


62  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

open  to  attack  most  seriously  on  its  northeast  frontier  and  therefore 
always  having  its  advanced  lines  as  far  as  possible  on  Syrian  soil. 
That  this  has  always  been  so  and  is  so  to-day  may  be  seen  from  a 
brief  survey  of  Egypt's  history  with  this  one  point  in  view. 

From  the  time  of  the  first  dynasty,  Egypt  held  the  Sinaitic  peninsula. 
Stress  has  hitherto  been  laid  entirely  on  the  commercial  reasons  for 
this.  But  it  must  also  have  its  military  importance  in  keeping  back 
those  Bedawin  whose  conquest  is  so  often  mentioned.  With  the 
Hyksos  conquest,  the  danger  clearly  showed  itself,  a  forerunner  of 
the  many  conquests  of  Egypt  from  this  side.  The  reaction  against 
these  Hyksos,  as  is  well  known,  resulted  in  a  sudden  extension  of  the 
frontier  to  the  Euphrates.  We  have  no  reason  to  suppose  that  this 
sudden  advance  was  due  entirely,  or  even  primarily,  to  desire  for 
revenge,  to  lust  for  conquest,  or  to  hopes  of  gain.  By  this  time,  it 
must  have  been  apparent  to  thinking  Egyptians  that  Egypt  proper  could 
be  protected  against  barbarian  inroads  only  when  a  buffer  on  Syrian 
soil  existed.  In  very  truth,  when  once  these  Syrian  barriers  have  been 
beaten  down,  generally  by  long  patient  attack,  Egypt  itself  nas  been 
taken  with  a  rush.  How  important  this  outer  line  was  considered  may 
be  seen  from  the  frantic  attempts  of  the  Ramessidae  to  hold  it  against 
ever  increasing  odds.  At  last,  all  was  lost  and  the  last  important 
attempt  to  hold  Syria  was  that  of  Shishak. 

Now,  it  will  be  generally  admitted,  it  is  Egypt  and  no  other  power 
which  is  interfering  in  Syria.  Under  no  circumstances  can  room  be 
found  for  a  Negeb  Mugri,  for  we  have  the  accounts  of  the  Egyptian 
rulers  themselves  in  good  Egyptian.  We  have,  then,  no  inscriptional 
proof  of  such  a  Negeb  kingdom  until  at  least  after  948  or  thereabouts, 
since  Shishak  was  then  the  leading  power  on  the  south  frontier.  Nor 
do  the  advocates  of  the  theory  find  any  such  proof  after  674,  when 
Esarhaddon  made  the  first  of  his  attacks  on  Egypt.  All  the  political 
events,  then,  in  which  Mugri  can  have  been  concerned  as  a  nation,  must 
have  occurred,  if  at  all,  between  948  and  674.  Let  us,  however,  for 
the  moment,  leave  these  centuries  aside  and  continue  our  study  of 
Egypt  in  Syria. 

The  Assyrian  conquest  of  Egypt  was  temporary.  As  soon  as  they 
were  expelled,  we  find  the  new  native  dynasty,  not  content  with  Egypt 
alone,  trying  to  secure  advanced  lines  in  Syria.  Psammetichus  about 
640  besieged  Ascalon.  Necho  managed  for  three  years,  608-605,  to 
hold  the  whole  country  to  the  Euphrates.  Even  after  his  defeat  by 
Nebuchadnezzar,  he  retained,  if  we  can  trust  II  Kings  24^,  the  territory 
to  the  south  of  the  brook  of  Egypt.  It  was  on  the  help  of  Apries  of 
Egypt  that  Zedekiah  relied  when  he  revolted  from  the  Babylonians. 

The  conquest  of  Syria  by  the  Persians  naturally  led  to  the  easy  con- 


BABYLONIA   AND    SYRIA  63 

quest  of  Egypt.  Conversely,  when  the  Egyptians  revolted  against 
Persia,  the  first  idea  was  to  block  Persian  advance  by  implicating 
Syria  in  the  revolt.  Examples  are  the  invasion  of  Syria  by  Tachos 
and  the  revolt  of  Sidon  instigated  by  Nectanebo.  When  Sidon  fell, — 
note  again  the  close  connection, — Artaxerxes  III  had  no  difficulty  in 
again  taking  the  Nile  valley. 

It  is  a  commonplace  among  historians  that,  of  all  the  generals  of 
Alexander,  Ptolemy  was  the  wisest  in  that  he  laid  aside  hopes  of 
general  dominion  and  concentrated  his  energies  on  one  definite  and 
distinct  part  of  the  empire,  there  to  found  a  kingdom.  Remembering 
this,  it  is  extremely  interesting  to  see  that  he  too  saw  the  necessity  of 
the  Syrian  barrier.  So  long  as  this  barrier  was  held,  Egypt  was  per- 
fectly secure,  but  when  Antiochus  III  in  198  won  Palestine,  the  way 
was  opened  for  the  advance  of  Antiochus  I V  and  only  the  intervention 
of  Rome  to  preserve  an  artificial  balance  of  power  prevented  the 
natural  result,  the  conquest  of  Egypt,  from  following  this  loss. 

We  see  exactly  the  same  condition  of  affairs  during  the  Crusades. 
The  Muslims  of  Egypt  never  felt  safe  while  Syria  was  in  the  hands 
of  the  Franks  and  strove,  generally  with  success,  to  hold  a  part  of 
Southern  Syria  as  a  barrier.  On  the  other  hand,  the  possession  of  a 
base  in  Syria,  whence  wealthy  Egypt  might  be  attacked,  played  no 
small  part  in  Crusading  policy.  Nor  is  it  out  of  place  to  mention  the 
tenacity  of  Mamluk  control   of   Southern   Syria. 

The  same  conditions  have  held  good  in  modern  times.  Napoleon 
saw  how  weak  was  his  power  in  Egypt  when  Syria  was  in  the  hands 
of  the  enemy,  and  failure  there  led  in  no  small  measure  to  the  failure 
in  Egypt.  Muhammed  Ali  as  clearly  recognized  the  need  of  Syria  to 
his  attempt  to  found  a  dynasty  in  Egypt.  And  to-day  it  is  the  same. 
England  in  Egypt  has  seen  this  need,  and  the  boundary  is  not  at  the 
Isthmus  of  Suez,  the  seemingly  natural  boundary,  but  at  Raphia,  five 
days  to  the  northeast  across  the  desert.  The  most  northern  garrison 
of  Egypt  to-day  is  at  el  'Arish,  the  ancient  Rhinocolura,  on  the  banks 
of  what  was  once  the  "  brook  of  Egypt."  Geographically,  both  Raphia 
and  Rhinocolura  belong  to  Syria,  not  Egypt,  for  the  real  desert  begins 
to  the  south.  I  do  not  see  how  one  can  stand  under  the  Egyptian 
flag,  remember  the  long  history  which  has  shown  the  urgent  need  for 
Egypt  of  advanced  lines  in  Syria,  and  still  deny  that  the  dry  torrent 
bed  at  one's  feet  was  called  the  nahal  Migraim  because  it  was  the 
frontier  of  that  country. 

Now  it  may  be  said  that  these  facts  do  not  absolutely  disprove 
Winckler's  theory.  In  a  sense  this  is  true.  What  has  been  shown 
is  that  all  the  indications  of  all  the  history,  except  that  period  in  dis- 
pute, point  to  Egypt  as  the  one  great  power  on  the  southern   frontier 


64  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

of  Syria.  In  other  words,  we  have  what  is  called  in  law  a  rebuttal 
presumption,  a  presumption  which  will  be  accepted  as  presumed  fact 
unless  definite  evidence  to  the  contrary  is  brought  up.  This  may  be 
stated  as  follows:  In  all  periods  save  948-674,  the  great,  for  any  im- 
portant purpose,  the  only  intriguing  power  on  the  south  Syrian  frontier 
was  Egypt.  Therefore,  general  physical  and  political  conditions  re- 
maining the  same,  approximately,  we  may  assume  that  it  was  also 
Egypt  which  was  the  disturbing  force  in  that  period  of  less  than  three 
centuries.  This  is  certainly  a  fair  presumption,  and  we  must  have  strong 
evidence  to  the  contrary  to  force  us  to  abandon  it. 

Such  evidence  can  hardly  be  shown  to  be  forthcoming.  Such  deduc- 
tions as  we  can  draw  from  general  considerations  are  distinctly  un- 
favorable to  Winckler's  theory.  It  is  true  that  a  trade  route  ran  from 
South  Arabia  to  Gaza,  although  it  is  a  serious  question  as  to  how 
important  this  was  as  compared  with  the  Red  Sea  ports.  Nor  has  ever 
an  important  army  come  from  Arabia  along  this  route.  It  is  also 
true  that  a  large  number  of  movements  of  tribes  fr'^m  South  Arabia 
to  the  Syrian  regions  have  taken  place.  But  they  have  not  followed 
the  Gaza  road.  In  the  greatest  of  these,  that  of  the  Muslim  conquest, 
the  main  army  followed  the  Haj  road  to  Damascus,  and  Antioch  was 
taken  at  about  the  same  time  as  Gaza.  So  far  as  we  can  see,  all  the 
tribal  movements  from.  South  Arabia  have  followed  the  same  course. 
It  has  always  been  easy  for  the  Arabian  invaders  to  follow  the  Haj 
road.  It  was  only  when  they  left  and  turned  west  that  the  advance 
was  checked.  Often  there  has  been  practically  no  advance,  as  in  the 
case  of  the  Ghassanidae,  at  other  times,  it  has  been  comparatively 
small  as  with  the  Nabataeans.  A  good  modern  case  of  a  tribe  migrat- 
ing to  Syria  from  South  Arabia  is  that  of  the  Beni  Sakhr.  Why  did 
they  settle  east  of  the  Jordan  instead  of  in  the  Negeb?  Much  must 
be  attributed  to  the  somewhat  greater  fertility  of  the  East  Jordan 
country,  though  the  Negeb  can  be  made  again  fertile  by  irrigation,  as 
in  Roman  times.  But  a  greater  objection  is  the  difficulty  of  access 
to  the  Negeb  from  the  east.  Much  has  been  made  by  the  geographers 
of  the  great  Jordan  rift  and  its  divisive  influences.  After  personal 
knowledge  of  both  parts  of  the  depression,  I  feel  sure  that  the  Arabah, 
the  region  south  of  the  Dead  Sea,  is  far  more  of  a  barrier  with  its 
terribly  steep  and  rough  trails.  The  Negeb  seems  to  be  Arabic,  not  as 
a  result  of  the  great  waves  of  migration  but  as  the  result  of  a  gradual 
infiltration.  We  shall  naturally  expect,  then,  that  Egyptian  influence 
will  be  felt  strongly,  if  not  exclusively,  on  the  southwest,  while  such 
South  Arabian  influence  as  there  may  have  been, — there  is  no  proof 
that  it  was  strong, — would  be  exerted  on  the  southeast  and  so  most 
strongly  on  the  East  Jordan  country. 


BABYLONIA   AND    SYRIA  6$ 

Let  us  now  take  up  in  some  detail  the  events  of  the  period  in  which 
Mugri  of  the  Negeb  is  supposed  to  have  played  a  part.  It  is  somewhat 
surprising  to  find  in  the  Very  first  reign  we  take  up,  that  of  Ashur 
bani  pal,  no  reference  to  Mugri  of  the  Negeb,  but  plenty  of  references 
to  Egypt  under  the  same  name.  Why  is  this?  Because  the  references 
to  Mugri  are  now  so  detailed  that  identification  with  Mugri  must  be 
made.  Many  of  these  Mugrites  are  actually  known  to  us  as  rulers  from 
their  own  inscriptions  written  in  Egyptian,  and  the  greater  part  of  the 
long  list  of  localities  named  by  Ashur  bani  pal  can  be  located  in  the 
Nile  valley.  No  theory  can  force  us  to  find  a  Mugri  of  the  Negeb 
here.      This  being  so,  let  us  see  what  we  can  learn  of  Egypt. 

First  as  to  the  use  of  terms.  Ashur  bani  pal  twice  describes  the 
objective  of  the  expeditions.  Once,  Ras.  CyL,  I.  53,  it  is  against  Magan 
and  Meluhha,  once  L  57,  it  is  against  Mugur  and  Kusi.  Here  Magan  and 
Meluhha  are  merely  the  high  sounding,  archaistic  forms  of  Mugur  and 
Kusi.  This  use  of  old  names  to  represent  altered  political  conditions 
is  quite  characteristic  of  the  Sargonid  dynasty,  compare  the  use  of 
Mash,  Martu,  Gutium,  Hashmar.  Clearly,  then,  to  Ashur  bani  pal, 
whatever  the  earlier  significance,  Magan  stood  for  Mugur,  and  Meluhha 
was  Kusi.  The  possibility  of  such  extension  or  transference  of  names 
is  of  course  one  of  the  commonplaces  of  historical  geography,  com- 
pare, e.  g.,  Hilakku  north  of  the  Taurus,  the  later  Cilicia  south  of  it. 
But,  to  that  ruler,  Mugur  meant  Egypt  and  Kusi  Ethiopia  as  I.  122  /. 
shows.  Meluhha,  then,  was,  at  this  time,  Ethiopia.  It  is  then  probable 
that  during  the  half  century  which  had  elapsed  since  the  accession  of 
the  dynasty,  there  had  been  no  important  change  in  the  nomenclature. 
If  this  is  true,  then  the  reference  to  Mugri,  a  region  of  Ethiopia,  by 
Sargon  simply  shows  that  he  knew, — and  it  would  be  amazing  if  he 
did  not, — that  Ethiopians  were  in  control  of  Egypt.  Another  sig- 
nificant fact  it  is  that  he  received  "  great  horses "  as  tribute  from 
Egypt  (Mugur).  Sargon  extended  his  boundary  to  the  "brook  of 
Egypt,"  nahal  Mugri.  He  also  mentions  "  great  horses  "  of  Muguri,  A. 
440.  We  may  feel  that  the  earlier  lack  of  horses  in  Egypt  ought  to 
forbid  finding  them  there  in  the  Sargonid  period,  but  when  we  actually 
do  find  them,  and  "  great  horses  "  at  that,  in  the  time  of  Ashur  bani  pal, 
we  have  no  right  to  deny  the  Egyptian  origin  of  "  great  horses  "  from 
Muguri  claimed  by  a  king  who  but  fifty  years  before  had  reached  the 
boundary  of  Egypt. 

Much  stress  has  been  laid  on  the  difference  in  form,  Mugri,  Mugur, 
Muguri,  Migir,  Migri,  It  is  to  be  feared  that  those  who  do  so  depend  too 
much  on  rules  of  phonetics  as  found  in  grammars.  All  that  is  indi- 
cated by  these  different  forms,  strange  as  it  may  seem  to  one  accus- 
tomed to  the  more  fixed  character  of  Aryan  vowel  sounds,  is  that  the 

5 


66  WESTERN   ASIA   IN    THE  DAYS   OF   SARGON 

ancient  orientals,  like  the  modern,  must  have  felt  perfectly  at  liberty 
to  modify,  elide,  or  insert  one  of  the  obscure  short  vowels.  Any 
unfortunate  traveller  who  has  attempted  to  write  down  exactly  the 
vowel  sounds  in  a  new  proper  name  from  the  mouth  of  a  native  will 
understand  the  modification  such  words  are  capable  of.  We  have 
already  seen  that  Muguri  and  Mugur  must  be  connected.  Ashur  bani 
pal  uses  the  form  Mugur,  but  the  Babylonian  Chronicle  IV.  30  uses 
the  form  Migir,  while  the  Amarna  tablets  regularly  use  Migri.  The 
step  to  MuQri  is  short. 

The  final  conquest  of  Egypt  was  due  to  Ashur  bani  pal,  but  the  earlier 
expeditions  were  led  by  his  father  Esarhaddon.  Indeed,  it  is  generally 
recognized  that  the  expedition  of  year  I  of  Ashur  bani  pal  according 
to  his  Prism  is  that  attributed  to  year  XII  of  Esarhaddon  by  Bab. 
Chron.,  IV.  30.  The  expedition  of  year  X,  ih.,  IV.  23,  was  also  clearly 
against  Egypt,  for  Memphis  is  mentioned  by  name  as  captured.  The 
three  battles  they  were  now  forced  to  fight  would  make  us  suspect  that 
the  last  expedition  was  not  a  success,  and  indeed  under  year  VII,  ib.  IV. 
16,  we  are  told  that  the  Assyrians  were  defeated  in  Egjrpt.  In  year 
VI,  Meluhha  is  attacked,  if  we  are  to  accept  Winckler's  restoration. 
As  this  is  a  Babylonian  document,  Meluhha  more  probably  meant  the 
Sinaitic  peninsula,  though  its  use  as  meaning  "  South  West  Land," 
corresponding  to  Martu  for  "  West  Land,"  is  perhaps  as  probable.  We 
have  then  a  definite  advance  in  years  VI,  VII,  X,  XII. 

Year  VI  was  675  and  year  VII  674.  We  should  therefore  expect 
some  reference  to  so  important  an  event  as  the  invasion  of  Egypt  in 
the  Prisms  of  Esarhaddon,  which  date  from  673.  Only  one  place  is 
possible.  This  is  where  we  have  the  mutilated  lines  I.  55-II.  5.  The 
Arzani  city  of  I.  55  is  a  problem,  but  the  nahal  Miigri,  "  brook  of 
Egypt,"  shows  where  we  are.  Another  reference  which  clearly  locates 
this  "  rook  of  Egypt "  is  the  fragment  of  Esarhaddon's  Annals,  K. 
3082  +  3086 ;+  S.  2027,  first  published  by  Boscawen,  Trans.  Soc.  Bibl. 
Arch.,  IV.  84  if.,  and  more  fully  by  Budge,  Hist,  of  Esarhaddon,  1881, 
114  ff.  The  reverse  refers  to  the  Arabian  campaign.  The  expedition 
took  place  in  Nisan  of  year  X,  1.  12,  This  is  clearly  the  one  of  year 
X  when  Memphis  was  taken,  Bab.  Chron.,  IV.  23.  That  this  refers 
to  Egypt  is  further  proved  by  1.  15  where  we  hear  of  Baal  of  Tyre 
trusting  to  Tarqu  of  Kusi  who  is,  of  course,  Taharka  of  Ethiopia. 
Esarhaddon  claims  the  victory,  and  the  impartial  Babylonian  Chronicle 
states  that  he  conquered  Memphis.  On  the  other  hand,  he  made  no 
expedition  in  the  next  year,  according  to  the  same  source,  and  it  is 
therefore  probable  that,  when  he  says  that  he  directed  his  way  from 
Mugur  to  Meluhha,  he  was  really  falling  back  from  Egypt.  Here 
Meluhha  is  used  clearly  in  a  different  and   older  sense,   for  it  is   the 


BABYLONIA    AND    SYRIA  6/ 

region  on  the  immediate  frontier  of  Egypt  through  which  he  retreats. 
He  went  thirty  kasbu  from  the  city  Apqu  (Aphek?)  of  the  region  (or 
boundary,  pat)  of  Samena  (Simeon?)  to  the  city  of  Rapihi.  to  the 
frontiers  of  nahal  Mugri,  a  place  where  a  river,  nar,  was  not,  so  that 
they  were  forced  to  transport  water.  Whether  Samena  be  the  tribe  of 
Simeon,  a  possible  identification,  Rapihi  is  certainly  Raphia,  and  the 
reference  to  frontiers,  iteti,  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  can  hardly  b'e  ex- 
plained as  other  than  being  at  Raphia,  a  situation  agreeing  well  with 
what  we  know  of  other  periods  and  of  our  own  day.  This  definite 
statement  that  there  was  no  nar,  river,  at  the  nahal  Mugri,  seems  to 
me  to  bt  very  strange.  A  curious  confirmation  of  the  quite  widely 
spread  theory  that  ehir  nari,  "  the  region  across  the  river,"  grew  up 
in  this  region !  I  do  not  know  what  linguistic  reasons  the  supporters 
may  have  for  calling  a  stream  bed  which  sometimes,  as,  for  example,  in 
the  year  we  visited  it,  has  not  in  the  whole  twelve  months  a  drop  of 
water  flowing,  a  river,  nor  do  I  know  any  case  where  the  modern  nahar 
or  its  equivalents  in  other  languages  are  used  for  what  is  properly  a 
nahal  or  wadi.  Certainly  Esarhaddon's  direct  denial  of  this  term  to 
our  stream  bed  seems  final.  In  this  connection,  I  may  note  that 
Winckler's  attempt  to  identify  the  nahal  Mugri  with  the  wadi  at  Raphia 
is  not  well  taken.  So  far  from  there  being  a  stream  bed  there,  important 
enough  to  mark  a  boundary,  one  must  needs  search  to  find  such  a 
depression  at  all.  There  is  no  real  stream  bed  worthy  of  the  name 
south  of  the  wadi  of  Gaza  until  one  reaches  the  Wadi  el  'Arish,  and 
this  is  much  more  marked  than  the  Gaza  wadi. 

We  have  seen  one  case  where  Meluhha  was  not  Ethiopia.  The 
tablet,  Keilinschr.  Bibl.,  II.  150  gives  Esarhaddon  the  title  "the  king 
of  the  kings  of  Mugur,  Paturisi,  Kusi."  That  these  refer  to  the 
various  kings  who  ruled  in  Egypt  can  hardly  be  doubted.  But  another, 
probably  later,  gives  to  Esarhaddon  himself  the  title  "  King  of  Mugur  " 
and  adds  "  who  took  captive  the  King  of  Meluh."  The  king  who  is  so 
definitely  pointed  out  in  a  short  display  inscription  as  worthy  of  special 
note  cannot  be  a  petty  Negeb  chief  of  a  wandering  tribe.  He  can  only 
be  the  greatest  of  the  Assyrian's  rivals,  Taharka  of  Ethiopia.  But  then 
Meluh  must  be  Ethiopia. 

We  have  a  similar  agreement  of  data  in  the  accounts  of  Semacherib's 
dealings  with  Egypt.  II  Kings  19®  distinctly  states  that  Taharka,  king 
of  Kush  (Kusi  or  Ethiopia),  made  an  advance  against  Sennacherib. 
It  is  unfortunate  that  just  here  we  are  very  uncertain  as  to  what  were 
the  original  sources  of  the  various  versions  so  badly  welded  together, 
but  that  they  are  nearly  contemporaneous  and  fairly  accurate  seems 
certain.  Whatever  errors  in  detail,  I  do  not  see  how  the  author  of 
such  a  document  could  fail  to  know  what  Egyptian  king,  in  an  advance 


68  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

on  another  Assyrian  king,  saved  Jerusalem.  That  Taharka  had  some 
reason  for  his  boasting  may  perhaps  be  surmised  from  his  Karnak  lists, 
cf,  Maspero,  Empires,  368.  Whatever  his  exaggerations,  the  basis 
may  well  have  been  a  victory  in  Syria. 

Of  great  evidential  value,  because  from  so  totally  different  a  source, 
is  the  story  of  Herodotus  II.  141  which  naturally  goes  back  to  Egyptian 
beginnings.  Here  Sanacharibos  invades  Egypt,  gets  as  far  as  Pelusium, 
— a  short  distance  beyond  'Arish, — and  is  driven  back  by  divine  inter- 
vention. The  story  no  doubt  is  fantastic  and  incorrectly  located  in 
Egyptian  history.  But  how  the  real  name  of  an  Assyrian  king,  correct 
in  every  consonant,  could  have  lingered  on  in  Egypt  as  part  of  folk 
story  for  over  two  centuries  I  can  only  explain  by  believing  that  some 
such  expedition  was  actually  undertaken. 

We  have  thus  two  foreign  and  absolutely  unconnected  sources  stating 
that  Sennacherib  had  important  dealing  with  Egypt.  It  would  be  ex- 
tremely strange,  if  we  should  find  no  trace  of  such  connections  in 
Sennacherib's  own  inscriptions.  Yet  this  is  what  we  must  face,  if,  with 
Winckler,  we  ascribe  Prism  II.  73  ff.  to  his  Negeb  Mugri.  Now  it 
has  been  said  that  the  real  Egyptian  relations  were  after  691  when  the 
Prism  ends,  the  date  of  the  capture  of  Babylon.  The  Babylonian 
Chronicle  also  stops  here,  and  the  rest  of  the  region  is  blank.  Why? 
It  is  hardly  going  too  far  to  assume  that  these  last  ten  years  were 
years  of  comparative  peace.  Sennacherib  could  not  have  been  a  very 
young  man,  when  he  ascended  the  throne,  and  he  was  now  probably 
becoming  old  and  less  energetic.  We  would  then  be  driven  to  take 
the  Altaqu  campaign.  Certainly  there  is  nothing  in  the  account  which 
forbids  our  taking  Muguri  as  Egypt.  There  is  no  better  time  than  just 
now  for  kings  instead  of  a  single  king  to  rule  Egypt,  for  now  was  the 
period  of  the  Delta  kings.  Nor  need  we  be  troubled  by  these  kings 
calling  in  the  king  of  Meluhha  or  Ethiopia.  That  is  just  what  was 
done.  At  least,  the  Ethiopian  came  in  and  probably  he  was  invited. 
The  king  had  a  body  of  chariots.  It  would  be  perfectly  easy  for 
chariots  to  come  through  the  level  desert  from  Egypt.  If  we  should 
take  Meluhha  to  be  Ma'in,  one  would  like  to  know  just  what  route 
these  chariots  took  in  their  way  down  Ma'in  to  Altaqu.  Our  own 
difficulties  in  carrying  pack  mules  over  the  steep  slippery  passes  of 
the  Arabah  would  make  us  doubt  the  possibility  of  the  attempt. 

It  is  possible  that  the  Egyptian  who  led  this  expedition  was  Shabaka. 
At  any  rate,  we  know  he  had  dealings  with  Assyria  in  this  period. 
His  seals  have  been  found  at  Kalhu,  attached  originally  to  a  treaty, 
as  the  string  marks  on  the  lumps  of  clay  indicate.  These  are  51-9-2, 
43,  and  81-2-4,  352,  Layard,  Nineveh  and  Babylon,  156  ff.,  the  inscrip- 
tions,   E.   A.   W.    Budge,   Mummy,    1893,   249.       Layard,    op.    cit.,    159, 


BABYLONIA   AND    SYRIA  69 

attributes  this  to  Sennacherib,  Budge,  Egypt,  1902,  VI.  127,  to  Sargon. 
The  latter  is  perhaps  more  probable,  as  Kalhu  was  rather  more  occupied 
by  him.  Perhaps  a  comparison  with  the  other  seals  of  Sargon,  K. 
391.  3781,  S.  2276,  might  settle  the  question. 

For  Sargon's  reign  we  have  only  general  probability  and  topography 
to  guide  us,  but  our  experience  thus  far  will  materially  assist.  In 
713  we  have  the  revolt  of  Ashdod  instigated  by  Piru,  king  of  Mugri, 
whom  we  naturally  take  to  be  a  Pharaoh  of  Egypt.  But  Winckler 
makes  him  a  ruler  of  the  Negeb  Mugri.  We  may  indeed  compare  the 
"Arabian"  Piram  of  Jarmuth,  Josh.  10'.  But  Pharaoh  is  regularly 
used  for  a  king  of  Egypt,  sometimes  alone,  sometimes  prefixed  to  the 
proper  name  as  Pharaoh  Necho.  Just  at  this  period  Pera  is  used  in 
this  sense  by  the  Egyptians  themselves.  The  Hebrews  regularly  used 
Pharaoh  as  a  proper  name,  and  the  Assyrians  took  lanzu  in  the  same 
fashion,  though  it  is  the  Kashshite  for  "  king."  There  are  therefore  good 
grounds  for  supposing  similar  action  in  changing  pera  into  Piru.  Egyptian 
intrigue  here  is  the  most  natural,  and  the  mention  of  a  Pharaoh  at  just  the 
time  when  this  title  was  most  in  use  in  Egypt  seems  quite  conclusive.  If 
the  kihri  nari  can  be  taken,  Ashdod  42,  in  the  face  of  the  statement  of 
the  Esarhaddon  Annals,  to  refer  to  Wadi  el  'Arish,  then  lamani  would 
be  fleeing  to  cross  the  border  at  'Arish.  The  explanation  given  above 
of  Mugri,  a  country  of  Ethiopia,  would  then  fit  well.  We  may  suspect 
that  perhaps  Egypt  did  not  give  up  the  fugitives.  Two  versions  of 
lamani's  fate  agree  with  two  regarding  Merodach  Baladan.  The  third 
admits  that  the  latter  escaped.      Was  the  same  true  of  the  former? 

Piru  appears  already  in  716  in  company  with  Samse,  queen  of  Aribbi 
and  Itamra  the  Sabaean.  Much  has  been  made  of  this.  In  the  Display 
Inscription,  23,  he  follows  Sibu  of  Muguri,  which  shows  that  the  two 
are  to  be  connected  topographically.  In  Annals  97,  he  follows 
Samaria.  Perhaps  this  is  because  mention  of  that  city  recalled  to  the 
scribe  the  ruler  who  intrigued  with  it. 

Sibu  of  Muguri  was  the  cause  of  the  revolt  of  Hanunu  of  Gaza.  He 
is  clearly  identical,  as  all  have  seen,  with  the  So  who  caused  the  falling 
away  of  Samaria,  his  name  perhaps  being  read  really  Sibu  or  the  like. 
Perhaps  we  are  not  justified  in  comparing  Shabaka,  even  if  we  take  the 
ka  to  be  a  suffix.  At  the  same  time,  the  resemblance  seems  hardly  an 
accident.  Whether  we  take  Sibu  as  Shabaka  will  depend  in  the  last 
resort  on  the  settlement  of  the  still  too  uncertain  chronology  of  the 
time  in  Egypt. 

There  is  one  difficult  question  for  the  advocates  of  the  theory  to 
answer.  If  Sibu  was  falling  back  from  Gaza  to  a  Negeb  Mugri  or  to 
Ma'in  itself,  why  did  he  go  southwest  to  Raphia?  This  is  on  the  road 
to    Egypt.       To   go    into   the    Negeb   proper,   he   should   have   proceeded 


70  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

south^a^f  along  the  well-travelled  road  to  Khalaga  (Elusa).  If  Sibu 
was  an  Egyptian,  all  is  clear.  He  was  falling  back  on  the  Egyptian 
frontier  at  Rhinocolura  ('Arish)  whence  he  had  summoned  his  tartan 
or  general,  for  so  we  must  take  it  with  the  Annals ;  the  Display  Inscrip- 
tion puts  Sibu  and  Piru  together  and  has  place  for  only  one  king.  He 
was  naturally  overtaken  at  Raphia, — his  tartan  had  probably  come  up, 
— and  the  battle  was  fought  at  Raphia,  where  later  the  Seleucidae  and 
Lagidae  contended  for  Palestine  and  where  the  present  Egyptian 
frontier  is  situated. 

Much  stress  is  also  laid  on  the  appointment  of  Idib'ili,  a  tribe  (or 
less  well  a  man)  to  the  office  of  qeputi^  over  {eli)  Mugri,  by  Tiglath 
Pileser  III,  Clay  Tablet  of  Nimrud,  56,  etc.  The  Assyrian  king  had 
just  driven  out  Hanunu  from  Gaza.  The  next  thing  was  an  advance 
on  Egypt.  To  do  so  in  safety,  it  was  necessary  to  buy  off  the  Arabian 
tribes  who  now,  as  in  the  days  of  Cambyses,  could  make  advance  on 
Egypt  impossible.  Our  passage  probably  means  only  that  these  tribes 
were  won  over  or  at  least  rendered  neutral  by  the  legalization  of  their 
attacks,  at  least  on  Egypt,  by  making  them  a  sort  of  officials,  A  close 
parallel  is  the  recognition  of  the  status  quo  among  the  Kurds  by  the 
present  Sultan  of  Turkey  legalizing  these  robber  bands  by  calling  them 
imperial  regiments. 

May  we  go  a  step  further  and  see  in  the  Mugrai  of  Shalmaneser  II, 
Monolith,  II.  92,  Egyptians?  We  note  at  once  that  there  is  no  topo- 
graphical order  in  the  list  of  contingents  and  thus  we  can  not  utilize 
this  means.  We  also  note  the  small  number,  one  thousand,  and  the 
fact  that  no  leader  is  named.  This  agrees  well  with  the  weak  condition 
of  Egypt  at  this  time,  less  than  a  century  after  Shishak  invaded 
Palestine  in  person.  In  this  connection,  it  is  perhaps  significant  that 
W.  M.  Miiller,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  1893,  209  if.,  seems  to  have  shown 
that  the  animals  attributed  to  Mugri  in  the  Black  Obelisk  are  really 
Egyptian. 

Such  are  the  main  passages  of  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  in  which  a 
Negeb  Mugri  has  been  found.  How  many  difficulties  are  in  the  way 
have  been  indicated.  One  more  question  occurs.  It  is  generally  agreed 
that  the  main  narrative  parts  of  the  Pentateuch  have  assumed  their 
present  form  about  850  to  650  B.  C,  that  is,  in  the  very  time  in  which 
it  is  assumed  that  Mugri  was  an  independent  power.  Scholars  are 
agreed  that  the  touches  of  local  Egyptian  color  in  these  stories  date 
from  just  this  same  period.  It  seems  to  be  an  important  part  of  the 
Mugri  theory  to  assume  that  the  story  of  the  Exodus  from  Egypt  was 
in  some  attenuated  form  an  exodus  from  the  Negeb  Mugri.  Now  the 
question  is  just  this.  How  was  it  that  the  exodus  story  was  trans- 
ferred  from  Mugri  to   Egypt  and  adorned  with  local  color  just  at  the 


BABYLONIA   AND   SYRIA  /I 

place  at  the  present  time.^^  Hamath,  as  already  noted,  was 
made  an  Assyrian  colony. 

In  the  case  of  one  city,  Samaria,^^  the  native  records  tell 
us  a  little  more  of  this  process  of  settlement.  The  city  itself 
had  already  been  taken  by  Shalmaneser,  but  all  further  ar- 
rangements seem  to  have  been  left  to  Sargon.  Twenty- 
seven  thousand  of  the  leading  citizens  of  the  kingdom  were 
deported^^  and  settled  in  Mesopotamia  and  Media,^®  there  to 

time  when,  according  to  the  theory,  Mugri  was  the  one  great  power 
of  the  southwestern  world?  Until  this  and  similar  questions  and 
objections  are  answered,  we  may  very  properly  refuse  to  accept  an 
independent  Mugri  in  the  Negeb. 

^'A  governor  of  Dimashqu  is  known  in  694,  one  of  Samalla  in  681, 
of  Samaria  in  645,  of  Cimirra  in  693,  of  Curri  (Tyre)  in  648,  of  Arpad 
in  692,  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  135  If.  None  of  Hamath  is  known.  In 
702,  Cil  Bel  was  king  of  Gaza,  Sennacherib,  Prism,  III.  25. 

^  The  more  usual  Assyrian  form  is  Samerina  A.  25,  97,  D.  22,  33,  B. 
21,  but  Samirina  occurs,  D.  33,  XIV.  15,  P.  IV.  31.  For  discussion 
as  to  the  actual  form  of  the  name  vocalized  in  the  present  Hebrew 
text  Shomeron,  but  more  probably  Shamerain  or  Shameron,  cf.  B.  Stade, 
Zeitschr.  f.  Alttest.  Wiss.,  IV.  165  if.  The  present  name,  Sebastieh, 
is  one  of  the  rare  instances  of  a  Greek  name,  Sebaste,  supplanting  an 
earlier  Semitic  one.     Visited  in  April,  1905- 

'^  The  number  of  deported,  27,290,  agrees  very  well  with  the  10,000 
taken  by  Nebuchadnezzar  from  the  much  poorer  Judah,  II  Kings,  24". 
Both,  if  somewhat  exaggerated,  have  the  look  of  probability  as  compared 
with  the  200,150  taken  from  Judah  by  Sennacherib,  Prism,  III.  17. 
It  is  curious  to  note  that  most  writers,  even  Maspero,  have  27,280. 

'^The  data  for  this  deportation  are  found  in  II  Kings  17';  18", 
which  seem  to  rest  on  nearly  contemporary,  perhaps  Assyrian,  sources. 
Of  the  two  centers,  one  is  clearly  in  Mesopotamia.  Halah  seems  to 
be  the  Chalkitis  of  Ptol.  V.  17.  4,  a  region  of  Mesopotamia  and  may 
possible  be  the  Chalkidike,  east  of  Apamaea,  of  Strabo,  XVI.  2.  11. 
That  it  is  also  the  Kalachene  of  Strabo  XVI  and  Ptol.  VI  is  asserted 
by  Jeremias,  Beitr.  z.  Assyr.  III.  92  and  Johns,  Deeds,  III.  478.  It 
is  clearly  the  city  Halahha  of  the  Geographical  Catalogue  II.  R.  53, 
36,  of  K.  10922,  and  of  79-7-8,  303,  4,  Schrader,  Keilinschr.  und  d.  Alte 
Test.,  and  Winckler,  Forsch.  I.  292.  Jensen,  /.  c,  and  Johns,  /.  c, 
place  this  latter  in  Assyria  proper  on  the  basis  of  an  identification 
of  the  city  of   Arbaha   which   is   next  mentioned  in   the   list,   with   the 


'J2  WESTERN    ASIA   IN    THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

form  a  nucleus  for  that  community  of  Jews,  who  for  a  long 
time  made  the  east  the  real  center  of  Jewish  thought.  But 
Samaria  was  not  abandoned.    The  city  was  rebuilt  and  the 

Armenian  Albagh.  But  the  connection  with  Harran  in  K.  10922  and 
with  Ragapa  in  II  R.  53  clearly  shows  it  to  be  rather  in  Mesopotamia. 
This  location  is  confirmed  by  the  letter  83-1-18,  6  =  H.  421,  discussed 
by  Johns,  Doomsday  Book,  25.  This  letter,  written  probably  in  the 
patois  of  the  district,  is  from  a  certain  Marduk  shum  ugur  who  informs 
the  king  that  ten  homers  of  seed  land  in  the  land  of  Halahhu,  granted 
by  his  royal  father,  perhaps  Sargon,  have  been  confiscated  by  the  gov- 
ernor of  Baralgu.  He  prays  for  redress,  as  he  cannot  leave  the  palace, 
on  account  of  his  duties  there,  to  attend  to  the  suit  in  person.  While 
it  might  be  rash  to  assert  that  Marduk  shum  ugur  was  actually  one  of 
the  absentee  landlords  who  held  their  serfs  by  the  feudal  tenure  we 
so  often  see,  the  fact  that  Bible,  census,  and  letter,  dovetail  so  neatly 
into  each  other  makes  the  probability  of  such  a  fact  strong.  K.  123  ^  J. 
750  is  another  document  of  this  sort,  for  it  is  a  list  of  lands  in  Hilahha 
belonging  to  Ahi  iaqamu  and  gives  the  names  of  owners  and  of  farm- 
steads.— We  have  here  a  good  instance  of  the  danger  of  conjectural 
emendation.  Winckler,  in  Alttest.  Untersuch.,  108  if.,  suggested 
Balah  for  Halah.  Fischer  has  done  exactly  the  same  thing  in  reading 
Balichitis  for  Chalcitis  in  Ptol.  V.  17,  4,  while  Muller  read  Charritis 
or  Harran.  We  now  know  that  the  manuscript  reading  is  to  be 
retained  in  each  case,  and  Winckler,  Forsch.,  I.  292,  has  withdrawn  his 
conjecture. 

The  Habor  is  clearly  the  Mesopotamian  Habur,  the  Chaboras  of  the 
Greeks.  Jeremias,  /.  c,  is  therefore  incorrect  in  making  it  the  small 
Assyrian  river  of  that  name  north  of  Mosul.  Gozan  again  is  not  the  Guzan 
southwest  of  Lake  Van,  Schrader,  Keilinschr.  u.  d.  Alte  Test.,  275,  but 
the  city  of  Guzana,  II.  R.  53  43a,  etc.,  the  Guazanitis  of  Ptol.  VI.  17.  4. 
An  absolute  proof  of  this  Jewish  settlement  is  found  in  K.  1366  =  H. 
662,  discussed  by  Johns,  Proc.  Soc.  Bibl.  Arch.,  1905,  188.  Here  we 
have  not  only  several  lau  (Yahweh)  names  but  a  certain  Halbishu  who 
is  called  the  Samaritan  (Samirinai).  Spiegel,  in  Delattre,  Mkdes,  no, 
reads  hare,  "  mountains,"  for  'are,  "  cities,"  of  the  Medes,  on  the  basis 
of  Septuagint.  I  have  long  suspected  myself  that  a  more  radical 
emendation  is  needed  to  find  a  Mesopotamian  town  or  country  but  have 
had  no  success.  However,  Ainsworth,  Proc.  Soc.  Bibl.  Arch.,  1892,  72, 
may  be  right  in  understanding  the  Medes  here  as  Mitani. 


BABYLONIA   AND    SYRIA  73 

survivors  made  Assyrian  citizens  with  the  usual  tribute  to 
be  paid  to  the  Assyrian  governor.^^ 

The  system  of  deportation  was  in  common  use  at  this 
time,  the  purpose  being  to  break  up  the  local  attachments 
and  to  make  the  new  settlers,  naturally  on  bad  terms  with 
the  original  inhabitants  of  the  land,  feel  that  they  owed 
everything  to  the  protection  of  the  imperial  power.  Five 
cases  are  known  at  least.  In  720  the  Aramaean  tribes  from 
near  Dur  ilu,  the  Tumunu  and  the  Mattisai,  were  settled  in 
Syria,  probably  at  Hamath.*^  In  717  the  revolted  Papa  and 
Lallukua,  two  tribes  of  Hittite  origin,  were  settled  in  Da- 
mascus.*^ In  715  Sargon  claims  to  have  settled  tribes 
in  Samaria  from  Arabia.  More  probably  this  was  merely 
an  acknowledgment  of  the  accomplished  fact.  As  the 
Syrian  localities  gradually  became  deserted  owing  to  the 
constant  civil  wars  and  the  attacks  of  Assyria,  the  resistance 
to  the  constant  pressure  from  the  desert  weakened  and  the 
Arabs  pushed  in  even  as  they  have  to  this  day,  when  we  still 
have  Bedawin  considerable  distances  west  of  the  Jordan. 
If  they  only  paid  tribute,  the  Assyrians  could  have  no  ob- 
jections to  their  settlement,  and  so  to  this  cause  perhaps  as 

"''A.  II  fF.;  D.  24  /.;  XIV.  15;  P.  IV.  3.1  /• ;  B.  21  ;  C.  19.  The  last 
three  refer  to  the  conquest  of  the  land  of  Bit  Humri,  "the  house  of 
Omri." — A  discussion  of  the  general  question  of  the  settlement  of 
Syria  would  carry  me  too  far  afield.  It  should  be  noted,  however,  that 
II  Kings  17^*"^,  which  is  often  assigned  to  this  reign,  can  hardly  be  so 
placed.  After  stripping  off  the  Deuteronomic  accretions,  we  seem  to 
have  an  authentic  core.  The  settlement  of  cultured  men  from  Babylon 
can  hardly  be  ascribed  to  the  Sargon  who  cared  so  well  for  that  city. 
Such  a  proceeding  would  be  appropriate  rather  to  Sennacherib  or  to 
Ashur  bani  pal.  Hamath  is  the  only  place  mentioned  in  the  Biblical 
lists  which  could  be  well  ascribed  to  Sargon's  reign,  and  in  this  case 
it  is  unlikely  that  men  from  Hamath  should  be  settled  so  near  home  as 
Samaria. 

*°  See  above. 

«  D.  49,  56. 


J^4  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

much  as  any  other  we  owe  the  Aramaization  of  this  region.*^ 
Daiukku  (Deioces)  of  Media  and  Itti  of  Allabria  were  set- 
tled at  Hamath.*^ 

These  four  desert  tribes  of  the  "  distant  Arabs "  **  were 
the  Tamudi,  the  ibadidi,*^  the  Marsimani,'*''  and  the  Haiapa. 
Their  former  location,  if  we  can  judge  from  the  identifica- 
tion of  the  Haiapa  with  the  Midianite  clan  Ephah,*^  was  on 
the  Gulf  of  Aqabah  and  along  the  eastern  shore  of  the  Red 
Sea.  It  is  also  in  this  region,  at  the  ruins  of  Medain  Calih, 
that  we  have  localized  the  story  of  the  Thamud,  clearly  the 
Tamudi  of  our  inscriptions.  This  Thamud,  according  to 
the  prophet  Mohammed,  was  a  great  prehistoric  tribe,  the 
successor  of  'Ad.  In  the  pride  of  their  hearts  they  "  made 
from  the  plains  castles  and  dug  out  the  mountains  into 
houses."  At  last  there  came  unto  them  the  prophet  Calih 
who  preached  to  them  the  doctrine  of  the  Unity.  Never- 
theless, they  would  not  accept  the  manifest  sign  of  the  she 
camel,  sprung  from  the  rock  in  witness  against  them,  but 
hardened  their  hearts  and  hamstrung  her.  Then  came  the 
great  earthquake,  and  in  the  morning  they  all  lay  on  their 
faces,  dead  in  their  houses.  Such  was  the  tale  told  by  the 
prophet  to  point  the  moral  to  those  who  would  not  accept 

"A.  52. 

«A.  94  ^. 

"  These  Arbai  had  already  been  "  conquered "  by  Tiglath  Pileser, 
Annals  J  219. 

"According  to  Halevy,  Rev.  Btud.  Juives,  1884,  12,  the  Ibadidi  are  the 
Ibad  Ded,  the  servants  of  the  well-known  god  Dad. 

*®  The  Marsimani  are,  according  to  F.  Delitzsch,  Wo  lag  das  Parodies, 
1 88 1,  304,  the  Maisaimameis  of  Ptolemy.  F.  Hommel,  Ancient  Hebrew 
Tradition,  1897,  195,  reads  Mar  Isimani  and  compares  the  Jeshimon  of 
Num.  21*,  etc.,  and  the  lasumunu  of  K.  3500. 

"  Gen.  25*,  etc.  Delitzsch,  Paradies,  304.  For  their  location,  cf.  E. 
Glaser,  Skizze  der  Gesch.  u.  Geog.  Arabiens,  1890,  II.  261. 


BABYLONIA    AND    SYRIA  75 

his  own  teaching.*^  In  reality,  Thamud  was  a  petty  tribe  in 
Assyrian  times,  and  as  a  petty  tribe  it  was  still  known  to  the 
Roman  geographers.*® 

To  the  same  year  we  have  assigned  the  "  tribute  " — the 
senders  no  doubt  considered  it  only  a  present  from  ruler  to 
ruler, — of  Piru  of  Mu<;ri  (Pharaoh  of  Egypt) ,^^  Samsi 
queen  of  the  land  of  Aribbi,  and  of  Itamra  of  Saba.  Does 
this  "tribute"  of  Pharaoh  mean  a  settlement  by  treaty  of 
the  Syrian  question  by  the  two  powers  interested?  The 
fact  that  there  has  been  found  at  Kalhu,  where  Sargon  at 
this  time  resided,  a  bit  of  clay,  evidently  affixed  to  a  parch- 
ment or  papyrus  document,  bearing  the  seals  of  Shabaka 
and  of  an  unknown  Assyrian  ruler,  seems  to  point  in  this 
direction.^^ 

Samsi,  queen  of  Aribbi,  is  interesting  to  us  as  representing 
the  older  matriarchal  form  of  authority  current  in  Arabia, 
the   classic  example   of   which  is   found   in  the   Queen   of 

^*  The  story  is  given  in  greatest  detail  in  Sura  VII.  71  if.  Elsewhere 
we  have  frequent  references,  often  extended.  Thus,  for  example,  Sura 
XIV  is  called  Al  Hajr,  "  the  rock,"  since  our  story  holds  the  main 
place  in  it.      The  later  writers  add  nothing  of  value, 

*®  The  form  Thamudenoi  occurs,  Diod.  III.  44 ;  Agatharcides,  Geog. 
Min.,  I.  181  ;  Plin.,  N.  H.,  28,  32.  Stephen  of  Byzantium,  sub  voc, 
quotes  Uranius  for  the  form  Thamuda.  The  Thamyditae  of  Ptol.  VI 
7.  4  may  be  the  same,  Schrader,  Keilinschr.  u,  Geschforch.,  263.  Per- 
haps we  are  also  to  see  it  in  the  Thamad  of  the  Talmud,  Wiesner, 
Ben.  Han.,  talm.  forsch.,  no.  39,  p.  iii  quoted  A.  Neubauer,  Geog.  du 
Talmud,  1868,  300  n.'  Glaser,  op.  cit.,  places  them  about  Mecca,  but 
the  legend  seems  to  place  it  further  north,  at  Medain  Calih,  where  we 
have  the  important  Nabataean  inscriptions. 

°°  Stress  has  been  laid  on  the  connection  of  Mucri  with  Aribbi.  Has 
it  ever  been  noted  that  Mugri  follows  Samaria?  May  not  the  mention 
of  Samaria  have  suggested  that  the  scribe  should  place  here  the  sub- 
mission of  the  power  which  had  supported   Samaria  in  its  last  revolt? 

"A.  H.  Layard,  Nineveh  and  Babylon,  1853,   156. 


•jd  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

Sheba  who  visited  Solomon. ^^  Samsi,  who  probably  lived 
in  the  desert  region  immediately  south  of  the  Euphrates 
rather  than  in  Arabia  proper,^^  had  already  sent  "  tribute  " 
to  Tiglath  Pileser.^* 

The  mention  of  Itamra  the  Sabaean  is  of  great  importance 
for  our  knowledge  of  Arabian  history.  Itamra  must  be  one 
of  the  mukarrib  (princes)  or  kings  who  appear  as  Yatha- 
'amar  in  the  Sabaean  inscriptions,^*^  and  thus  a  clue  is  se- 
cured for  the  chronology  of  pre-Muslim  Arabia.^^  It  also 
gives  us  a  new  conception  of  conditions  in  that  region.  If 
this  was  not  a  tribute,  but  rather  a  present  from  equal  to 
equal,  why  was  it  sent?  No  doubt,  it  was  felt  that  the  two 
civilized  powers  ought  to  unite  against  the  more  barbarous 
tribes  between.  Again,  as  the  two  countries  had  no  mutual 
boundaries  to  cause  friction,  so  they  had  no  commercial 
rivalries,  but  rather  they  had  goods  each  wished  to  exchange 
with  the  other.  Thus  far,  this  trade  had  been  in  the  hands 
of  Syrians,  but  the  merchants  of  Assyria  would  be  glad 
to  import  their  goods  themselves  and  by  a  less  round-about 
route.  The  most  important  reason,  no  doubt,  was  the  wish 
of  the  Sabaeans  to  displace  the  older  power  of  Ma'in.  To 
do  this  a  stroke  directed  at  their  commerce  would  accom- 
plish most.    Assyria  now  held  Gaza,  the  Mediterranean  port 

"  With  the  name  of  the  queen  Samsi  we  should  probably  compare 
the  form  Samsi  used  for  the  sun  god  Shamash  in  the  Harran  Census. 
This  is  another  hint  as  to  location. 

^  These  Aribbi  are  probably  to  be  located  on  the  north  border  of 
the  desert  near  the  Euphrates.  Here  Xenophon,  Anab.,  I,  5.  i  found  an 
Arabia,  here  were  the  Arabes  Skenitai  of  Strab.  XVI.  i.  3. 

''^  Annals  210. 

"  For  a  list  of  these  Yatha  'amars,  see  Mordtmann  and  Miiller, 
Sabdische  Denkmdler,  1883,  108.  Cf.  the  Ithamar,  son  of  Aaron, 
Ex.  6^. 

'^  This  chronology  is  still  uncertain,  since  we  do  not  know  whether 
we  are  dealing  with  a  real  king  or  with  an  earlier  makrab. 


BABYLONIA    AND    SYRIA  JJ 

of  the  Minaeans.    Assyria  seems  to  have  taken  the  side  of 
Saba  and  thus  accelerated  the  decay  of  Ma'in.*^^ 

For  about  six  years  after  the  settlement  of  720  Syria  re- 
mained fairly  quiet.  But,  whatever  the  truth  about  a  treaty 
with  Egypt,  that  country  continued  to  intrigue  with  the 
Philistine  coast.  About  714  Azuri,^^  king  of  Ashdod/® 
withheld  tribute  and  instigated  a  revolt  of  his  neighbors. 
This  was  quickly  quelled  and  his  brother,^*^  Ahimiti,  the 
crown  prince,^^  elevated  to  the  throne.  His  reign  was  short, 
for  the  anti-Assyrian  party  was  still  in  control,  and  as  soon 
as  the  Assyrian  army  retired  to  go  into  winter  quarters  he 
was  overthrown  and  a  mercenary  Greek  soldier  from  Cy- 
prus, called  lamani  or  "the  Ionian,"  was  chosen  in  his 
place.^2  The  revolt  spread  rapidly,  Gath,  Judah,  Moab,  and 
Edom  taking  part.**^ 

"  The  early  history  of  Arabia  is  worked  out  by  E.  Glaser,  Skizze  der 
Gesch,  Arabiens,  1889,  a  privately  published  work,  impossible  to  secure, 
cf.  his  Abessimier,  30.  See  also  Winckler,  in  Helmolt,  History  of 
the  World,  III.  248  and  often  in  his  Forsch. — Here  also  should  be 
placed  K.  1265,  published  by  Winckler,  Sammlung,  II.  62;  Johns, 
Deeds,  752 ;  translated  by  Winckler,  Forsch.,  I.  465,  and  discussed  by 
Johns,  op.  cit..  III.  538.  It  seems  to  report  a  tribute  of  164  white 
camels  sent  by  Hataranu  and  larapa,  the  headmen,  rab  kigir,  who  present 
the  tribute  of  this  same  Samsi  of  Aribbi.  Other  camels  are  sent  by 
Ganabu  and  Tamranu  who  are  soldiers.  For  the  names,  cf.  Johns, 
/.  c,  where  all  are  shown  to  bear  good  Arabic  names. 

**  We  also  have  Aziru  in  Amarna,  41  etc.  Tiele,  Gesch.,  270  com- 
pares the  Biblical  Azariah.      Schrader,  op.  cit.,  162  equates  with  'Azur. 

°®  Ashdod  was  called  Ashdudu  by  the  Assyrians,  Azotus  by  the  Greeks, 
and  is  the  modern  Esdud.      Visited  in  January,  1905- 

**  Schrader,  op.  cit.,  162,  makes  it  Ahimiti,  "my  brother  is  man"  or 
"  brother  of  death,"  comparing  Ahimoth  of  I  Chron.  6*". 

*^  For  talimu,  cf.  Winckler,  Forsch.,  II.   193. 

^  The  name  is  generally  written  lamani,  but  in  A.  220  the  form 
latna  is  used.  We  should  compare  the  similar  change  from  latnana 
and  lamna  as  applied  to.  Cyprus.  Johns,  Deeds,  III.  124  cites  the  forms 
lamanni,  lamanu,   lamani.     Winckler,  Mittheil.   Vorderasiat.  Gesellsch., 


78  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

How  important  this  outbreak  was  is  shown  by  the  haste 
with  which  Sargon  acted.  Although  it  was  still  early  in  the 
year  713,^*  too  early  for  the  feudal  levy  to  be  called  out,  he 
did  not  hesitate,  but  sent  his  tartan,  Ashur  igka  danin,®^ 
with  only  the  few  hundred"^  in  his  own  body  guard.  The 
Tigris  and  Euphrates  were  crossed  at  full  flood,  and  he 

I.  26  n.  I,  would  see  in  him  a  Yemanite  rather  than  an  Ionian.  But 
we  know  that  only  a  little  later  Cyprus  was  in  close  relations  with 
Assyria,  and  it  is  certainly  far  easier  for  a  Greek  to  come  across  the 
sea  from  Cyprus  than  for  a  South  Arabian  to  cross  that  country  to 
the  Philistine  seacoast.  Indeed,  a  better  time  for  the  intervention  of 
a  Greek  could  hardly  be  found.  The  almost  total  cessation  of  direct 
intercourse  between  Egypt  and  Greece  which  had  begun  at  the  end 
of  the  Mycenaean  period  proper,  was  now  past  and  the  century  750-650 
marks  the  ever-increasing  extension  of  the  Greeks.  As  H.  R.  Hall, 
Oldest  Civilization  of  Greece,  1901,  269  n.**,  well  observes,  the  passage 
Odyss.  XIV.  257  if.,  where  we  have  Cretan  pirates  plundering  the 
Egyptian  coast  until  the  king  comes  out  in  person,  must  refer  to  this 
very  time  when  the  "  Delta  kings  "  divided  the  sovereignty  of  Egypt. 
So  strong  was  this  Greek  influence  and  so  nurflerous  were  the  Greek 
emigrants  that  barely  a  half  century  later  than  Sargon,  the  Greeks  had 
their  own  cities  in  Egypt,  the  Melesian  Fort,  Daphnae^  and  Naucratis. 
It  is  the  most  natural  thing  in  the  world  to  assume  that,  in  this  great 
outpouring  of  the  Greek  nation,  a  Greek  pirate  turned  up  in  Ashdod, 
and,  in  virtue  of  his  superior  armor  and  superior  military  training 
which  was  already  admitted,  should  take  charge  of  affairs.  It  is  rather 
more  difficult  to  see  such  a  leader  in  the  conductor  of  a  Minaean  caravan. 
Compare  also  the  Krethim  of  David's  body  guard,  called  Cretans  by  the 
Greek  version. 

®  The  Assyrian  forms  are  Piliste,  Gimtu,  laudu,  Udumu,  Mabu.  On 
our  last  trip,  we  visited  Edom  and  Moab. 

**  I  have  finally  concluded  that  the  chronology  of  the  Prism  is  the 
more  probable.      The  Annals  gives  711.      See  introduction. 

^  That  he  was  tartan  is  shown  by  K.  998,  quoted  by  Johns,  Deeds,  II. 
69.  Note  also  that  lamani  is  carried  to  Sargon's  presence,  D.  109  fF.', 
XIV.  14. 

^  If  Winckler  correctly  understands  K.  82-3-23,  131,  he  had  but  420. 

^^  G.  Smith,  Discoveries,  293,  compares  the  similar  action  of  Hezekiah, 

II.  Chron.  2^-*.  I  do  not  see  where  the  water  came  from.  Only  wells 
are  used  now. 


BABYLONIA   AND   SYRIA  79 

suddenly  appeared  in  Syria.  lamani  had  made  his  prepa- 
rations, had  surrounded  the  low-lying  city  with  a  trench, 
secured  a  water  supply  from  outside  the  city,^^  and  called  to 
his  aid  troops  from  other  parts  of  the  country.  In  spite  of 
all  this,  he  lost  his  heart  when  the  Assyrians  appeared  so 
suddenly  and  fled  to  Egypt  whence  he  was  extradited  and 
handed  over  to  Sargon.^^ 

The  cities  of  the  Philistine  plain  were  thus  left  defense- 
less and  at  least  Ashdod  with  its  port^^  and  Gath^*^  were 
taken.    Their  inhabitants,  men  and  gods  alike,  were  carried 

**A.  225  states  that  he  was  carried  from  Ashdod  directly,  yet  D.  109 
ff.)  XIV.  14,  states  that  he  fled  to  Egypt  and  was  extradited  from  thence. 
We  have  also  two  such  statements  in  the  case  of  Merodach  Baladan 
along  side  of  a  third  which  relates  his  escape.  Is  such  a  third  pos- 
sibility to  be  considered  here?  When  Muguri  is  said  to  be  sha  pat 
of  the  region  of  Meluhha,  need  it  mean  more  than  that  the  fact  of 
Ethiopic  control  was  known  in  Nineveh?  It  is  well  known  that  the 
famous  treaty  between  Ramessu  II  and  the  Hittites  contained  an  ex- 
tradition clause.      Such  treaties  may  still  have  been  made. 

The  use  of  Meluhha  for  Ethiopia  is  a  mere  archaism  such  as  is 
very  common  in  the  later  Assyrian  empire,  cf.  e.  g.,  Martu,  Muski, 
Hashmar,  Mash,  not  one  name  of  which  seems  really  to  correspond  to 
conditions  in  the  time  of  Sargon.  This  is  clearly  shown  in  Ashur  bani 
pal,  Ras,  Cyl.,  where  I  52  ana  Magan  u  Meluhha  exactly  corresponds 
with  ana  Mugur  u  Kusi. 

®®  Called  Asdudimmu  which  Cheyne,  Book  of  Isaiah,  1895,  121,  com- 
pares with  Ashdod  hay  Yam  or  the  seaport.  It  was  the  Azotas  Paralios 
of  the  classical  writers  and  the  Mahuz  Azdud  of  Muqadasi,  Le  Strange, 
Palestine,  24.  Its  present  name,  Minet  el  Qal'a,  is  derived  from  the 
little  modern  fort  which  is  the  only  building  now  there.  The  ruins 
of  the  classical  city  are  low  lying  and  covered  with  sand  and  so  worked 
over  by  diggers  that  excavations  would  be  of  little  value.  Much  fine 
marble  is  dug  up  and  many  trinkets  were  offered  us  for  sale.  The 
city  seems  to  have  been  large  and  important  and  lay  directly  on  the 
sea.  There  was  no  harbor.  To  reach  it  is  now  a  hard  hour's  struggle 
over  the  blown  sands.      Visited  in  January,  1905. 

"  Gath  is  the  Gimtu  of  the  Assyrians.  Its  site  is  not  known  but 
Tell  es  Safi,  which  we  visited  in  January,  1905,  is  a  splendid  situation 
and  is  not  forbidden  by  the  data  we  possess. 


80  WESTERN   ASIA   IN    THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

off  into  captivity.  But  these  towns  were  too  important  to 
remain  desolate  long.  They  were  therefore  rebuilt  and  set- 
tled with  loyal  colonists.  Over  them  was  probably  placed 
that  Mitinti  we  meet  as  king  early  in  the  reign  of  Sennache- 
rib."^^ The  other  revolted  states  probably  remained  un- 
conquered.  If  Sargon  now  held  the  cities  of  the  Philistine 
plain  and  controlled  the  great  trade  routes,  he  could  afford 
to  permit  a  precarious  liberty  to  the  mountaineers  of  Judah, 
Moab,  and  Ammon.'^ 

This  sudden  punishment  seems  to  have  strongly  impressed 
the  imagination  of  the  Syrians  and  to  have  had  a  good 
effect  in  keeping  Syria  quiet.  There  are  no  further  accounts 
of  revolts.  For  the  twelve  years  which  extend  to  the 
invasion  of  Sennacherib  in  701,  there  is  absolutely  not  a 
single  fact  known  in  regard  to  the  history  of  Syria. 

"According  to  A.  271,  a  governor  was  placed  over  the  city  but  this 
is  probably  a  mere  formula,  as  Sennacherib,  Prism  II.  51  (702)  already 
knows  Mitinti  as  king. 

"A.  215  ff.;  XIV.  14;  D.  90  ff.  The  fragments  of  Prism  A.  give 
more  detail.  A  few  additions  are  made  from  K.  82-3-23,  131,  published 
by  Winckler,  Forsch.,  II.  570  if. — Ascalon  seems  to  have  remained  quiet 
under  its  pro-Assyrian  king,  Rukibti,  Sennacherib,  Prism  II.  62. 


CHAPTER   IV 

THE  NORTHWEST  FRONTIER 

The  second  of  the  frontiers  was  that  on  the  northwest 
which  we  have  already  touched  upon  in  mentioning  Samal.^ 
Here  the  greatest  advance  in  the  reign  took  place,  although 
the  region  had  already  been  conquered  by  Shalmaneser  I 
and  Tiglath  Pileser  I.  The  half-century-long  weakness  of 
Assyria  had  given  Haldia  control  of  this  region.  Tiglath 
Pileser  HI  broke  the  power  of  Sardurish  and  forced  the 
states  to  pay  tribute.  For  some  reason  he  did  not  attempt 
to  inflict  his  provincial  system  on  them.  Consequently,  on 
his  death,  Haldia  once  more  gained  the  ascendency.^ 

Conditions  were,  however,  changed,  and  Haldia  found  a 
new  power  which  was,  if  a  rival,  also  an  ally  against  Assyria. 
This  new  power  was  that  of  Mita  of  Muski,  or,  to  give  him 
the  name  he  more  commonly  is  known  by,  Midas  the 
Phrygian.^ 

^  Cf.  chap.  III.  n.  20. 

^  Annals,   59   If. 

^  The  fact  that  Midas  and  Mita  were  equivalent  was  first  noted  by  H. 
Rawlinson,  in  G.  Rawlinson,  Herodotus,^  I.  131,  quoted  by  G.  Rawlinson, 
Monarchies,  II.  151,  n.  7.  The  definite  working  out  of  this  identifica-. 
tion  was  first  done  by  Winckler,  Forsch,,  II.  136.  He  seems  to  think 
that  Mita  was  actually  the  Midas  of  the  Greeks.  But  I  rather  believe 
that  the  Mita  lord  of  the  [city]  of  the  oracle  83-1-18,  557  =:  Kn.  51 
is  the  Midas  who  killed  himself  when  defeated  by  the  Cimmerians, 
Strabo,  I.  3.  21.  The  names  of  Gordius  and  Midas  alternated  in  the 
Phrygian  dynasty,  and  I  would,  therefore,  make  this  Mita  the  grand- 
father of  the  last  of  the  line. — In  the  time  of  Tiglath  Pileser  I,  Prism, 
I.  62  if.,  the  Muski  are  on  the  upper  Euphrates.  From  that  to  the  days 
of  Sargon,  there  is  no  reference  to  them,  I  believe  that  Winckler, 
/.  c,  is  right  in  thinking  that  Midas  the  Phygian  is  called  the  Muskian 
6  81 


82  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

Some  centuries  earlier  a  number  of  Thracian  tribes  had 
invaded  Asia  Minor.  The  most  important  of  these  were 
the  Phrygians,  who  seem  to  have  already  worked  their  way 
well  to  the  east  by  the  time  of  Tiglath  Pileser.  An  oppor- 
tunity for  decided  advance  was  here  presented.  Sardurish 
was  weakened  by  defeats  and  Shalmaneser  was  weak  in 
character.  By  the  time  when  Sargon  came  to  the  throne, 
all  Asia  Minor  was  Phrygian,  or  under  Phrygian  influence. 
His  actual  frontier  left  the  Mediterranean  at  Cilicia  Trachaea 
and  ran  past  Lake  Tatta  to  the  Halys  river,  the  earlier 
Haldian  boundary.  Pteria  itself,  the  old  Hittite  capital  in 
this  region,  was  probably  in  his  hands,  and  perhaps  from 
this  fact  he  gained  the  title  of  the  Muskian.  He  thus  had, 
it  would  seem,  as  large  an  immediate  kingdom  as  the  later 
Lydians,  while  his  influence  beyond  his  borders  to  the  east 
was  greater.  It  is  rather  startling  to  find  Carchemish  on  the 
Euphrates  revolting  at  Phrygian  instigation. 

The  first  operations  in  this  region  took  place  in  718.  In 
this  year,  Kiakki  of  Shinuhtu,*  a  petty  chieftain  of  Tabal, 
a  somewhat  ill-defined  term  applied  to  southern  Cappadocia,*^ 

by  the  Assyrians  only  because  he  had  conquered  the  territory  once  held 
by  the  Muski.  With  them  are  identical  the  Meshech  of  Gen.  lo^  and 
the  Moschoi  of  Herod.  III.  94,  etc.  Their  present  location  was  prob- 
ably about  Caesarea  Mazaka,  for  Philostorgius,  Hist.  EccL,  IX.  12, 
makes  as  eponymous  founder  of  that  city,  Mosoch,  the  ancestor  of  the 
Cappadocians. 

*  Delattre,  L'Asie  Occidentale,  quoted  by  Maspero,  op.  cit.^  239  n.', 
makes  Shinuhtu  the  capital  of  a  district  on  the  Saros.  This  would  bring 
it  only  a  few  miles  east  of  Tyana.  But  between  that  valley  and  the 
Tyana  region,  there  are  two  mountain  ranges  running  north  and  south, 
one  over  ten  thousand  feet  high,  and  there  are  no  roads  between.  If 
we  assume  that  the  advance  was  across  the  Cilician  Gates  and  that 
Shinuhtu  was  between  them  and  Tyana,  on  the  great  road,  we  have 
no  objection,  and  the  whole  series  of  campaigns  has  a  beginning  we 
can  understand. 

^  Tabal  corresponds  to  the  Tibarenoi  of  Herod.  III.  94,  etc.  At  this 
time,  it  clearly  means  South  Cappadocia  in  general. 


THE    NORTHWEST    FRONTIER  83 

refused  to  send  tribute  any  longer,  instigated,  it  may  be 
presumed,  by  Midas.  An  army  was  sent  against  him,  prob- 
ably that  commanded  by  the  governor  of  eastern  Cilicia  or 
Que.®  Tarsus  appears  to  have  been  the  base.  From  this  the 
army  followed  the  time-honored  war  route  which  led  through 
the  Cilician  Gates.'  In  the  rough  Taurus  country  to  the 
north  the  war  dragged  on  until  finally  Kiakki  and  his  fight- 
ing men  were  captured  and  deported.^ 

Shinuhtu  was  not  made  a  separate  province,  perhaps  be- 
cause it  was  too  small  and  too  poor  to  be  worth  the  trouble. 
A  certain  Matti  of  Tuna  (Tyana)®  offered  to  pay  a  higher 

'  Que  is  the  eastern  part  of  the  classical  Cilicia  whose  capital  was 
Tarzi  or  Tarsus,  Sachau,  Zeitschr.  /.  Assyr.^  1892,  98,  the  Koaios  of 
Hicks,  Jour.  Hellen.  Stud.,  XI.  no.  VI.  i,  and  the  Kouas  of  CIG.  4402, 
4410.  For  the  Assyrian  forms  Qu,  Qua,  Quai,  Quia,  cf.  Johns,  Deeds, 
III.  463.  W.  M.  Miiller,  Mitth.  Vorderasiat.  Gesell,  1898,  3,  59  com- 
pares Kyinda  =  Que  plus  nda. 

''  Cyrus  the  younger  and  Alexander,  for  example,  took  this  road.  In 
mediaeval  times,  it  was  the  Darb  es  Salamah,  the  great  war  route 
leading  north  from  the  Bab  al  Jihad  or  "  Gate  of  the  Holy  War," 
whence  each  year  an  army  went  forth  against  the  Christians,  cf.  Le 
Strange,  Eastern  Caliphate,  133  /.  The  new  railway  crosses  the  Taurus 
by  the  same  route. 

'  A.  42  ff. ;  D.  28  /.  That  he  is  called  shar  Tabali  does  not  mean 
that  he  is  king  of  all  Tabal,  N.  11.     Shar  may  here  mean  only  "  prince." 

"Tuna,  or,  with  prosthetic  aleph,  Atuna,  occurs  also  in  Annals  153  of 
Tiglath  Pileser.  I  have  no  doubt  that  it  is  the  classical  Tyana,  a 
highly  important  place,  cf.  W.  Ramsay,  Hist.  Geog.  Asia  Minor,  1890, 
546  n.,  and  Tyanitis,  the  region  immediately  about  it.  The  fact  that 
Hittite  inscriptions  have  been  found  at  the  nearby  Bor  is  a  further 
confirmation.  Sachau,  Zeitsch.  f.  Assyr.,  1892,  98  and  Maspero,  op. 
cit.,  239  n.^  think  it  rather  the  Tynna  of  Ptol.  V.  6.  22  and  C.I.L.  VI. 
5076.  It  is  very  peculiar  that  a  name  so  similar  to  Tyana  should  be 
found  so  near  it,  but  the  epigraphical  evidence  seems  to  prove  its  sepa- 
rate existence.  The  maps  omit  it.  But  whether  there  was  a  Tynna  or 
not,  I  cannot  understand  the  reasoning  which  would  prefer  a  practically 
unknown  town  to  a  city  so  old  that  it  was  later  considered  sacred 
and  so  important  that  it  gave  its  name  to  a  strategeia.  Winckler,  in  his 
map  opposite  p.  86,  Helmolt,  History,  places  it  at  Albistan.      He  thus 


84  WESTERN   ASIA   IN   THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

tribute  of  horses  and  mules,  of  gold  and  silver,  and  so  the 
country  was  handed  over  to  him  in  the  hope,  vain  as  it 
proved,  that  a  buffer  state  could  here  be  made  against 
Phrygia.  In  this  way,  too,  an  excuse  could  be  found  for  an 
attempted  control  of  Tyana  itself.  That  city,  even  then 
probably  an  important  religious  and  political  center,  com- 
manded the  great  cross  road  which  ran  from  Tarsus  through 
the  Cilician  Gates  past  Pteria  and  on  to  Sinope  on  the  Black 
Sea.  When  Matti  no  longer  was  faithful.  Tuna  came  under 
the  direct  control  of  the  Assyrians. ^^ 

The  next  year,  717,  we  find  an  expedition  against  Car- 
is  forced  to  deny  any  connection  between  Tuna  and  Tyana.  But  such 
a  location  likewise  has  serious  topographical  difficulties.  To  reach 
Albistan,  he  must  pass  Mar'ash  or  Malatia,  and  both  were  yet  uncon- 
quered.  Tuna  also  cuts  in  between  the  city  from  which  Kammanu  took 
its  name  and  its  capital  Meliddu.  Furthermore,  in  the  second  cam- 
paign against  Tuna,-  mentioned  only  in  Prism  B.  and  therefore  probably 
unnoticed  by  Winckler  when  he  made  this  identification,  we  have  first 
Tuna  and  then  Hilakku  attacked,  although  Malatia  and  Mar'ash  are 
still  unconquered,  and  the  road  between  Albistan  and  Mazaka  was  not 
easy.  On  the  other  hand,  if  we  still  allow  Tuna  to  be  Tyana,  we  have 
identification  with  a  well-known  later  site  and  we  have  a  gradual  and 
natural  advance  from  a  natural  base  in  Tarsus,  along  one  of  the  most 
famous  and  important  war  routes  of  the  ancient  world,  and  are  naturally 
led  on  to  Mazaka  around  which  Hilakku  must  be  placed.  Billerbeck, 
in  his  general  map  of  the  east,  Ency.  Bibl.,  still  clings  to  Tyana. — Both 
Professor  Sterrett  and  Professor  Ramsay  believe  Tyana  to  be  the  most 
inviting  site  for  excavations  in  Asia  Minor.  Professor  Sterrett  states 
that  the  Mar'ash-Albistan  and  Malatia-Albistan  roads  are  extremely  diffi- 
cult and  notes  that  Albistan  is  decidedly  off  the  main  lines  of  travel. 

"  Cf.  Ramsay,  op.  cit.,  228. — For  the  whole  chapter,  I  have  found  this 
work  of  Ramsay  of  the  utmost  value.  The  best  map  of  Asia  Minor  is 
that  by  J,  G.  Anderson,  1905,  which,  though  on  a  comparatively  small 
scale,  has  contour  lines,  and  the  Roman  roads,  and  thus  makes  the 
topography  capable  of  being  understood.  I  am  not  personally  acquainted 
with  the  country,  but  this  is  to  be  the  less  regretted,  as  I  have  been  able 
to  utilize  the  detailed  knowledge  of  the  whole  of  eastern  Asia  Minor 
which  Professor  J.  R.  S.  Sterrett  has  obtained  in  his  numerous  and 
fruitful  expeditions  for  the  exploration  of  that  part  of  the  East. 


THE    NORTHWEST    FRONTIER  85 

chemish  undertaken.^^  Why  it  had  been  so  long  spared  by 
the  Assyrians  we  can  only  surmise.  Probably  it  was,  like 
the  Phoenician  cities,  predominantly  mercantile,  perfectly 
willing  to  pay  tribute  so  long  as  it  could  trade,  and  careless 
as  to  the  political  changes  going  on  about  it.  During  the 
period  of  Assyrian  decline,  it  seems  to  have  been  left  in 
peace  to  its  own  devices  and  naturally  resented  the  loss  of 
freedom  and  especially  the  tribute  inflicted  by  Tiglath  Pi- 
leser,  since  it  probably  was  forced  to  make  up  arrears.^^ 
Pisiris,  who  had  held  the  throne  since  at  least  740,  was  at 
last  induced  by  Midas  to  throw  off  completely  the  Assyrian 
yoke. 

The  loss  of  Carchemish  was  serious.  It  commanded  the 
great  high  road  to  Asia  Minor  and  to  Egypt,  and  its  posses- 
sion by  a  foreign  power  blocked  the  way  to  the  west  for 
both  caravans  and  armies.  Furthermore,  as  an  advanced 
post  for  Midas  it  was  dangerously  near  the  old  capital  of 
Mesopotamia,  Harran.  Add  to  this  the  fact  that  Carchemish 
was  the  great  commercial  rival  of  Kalhu,  and  it  may  be  seen 
that  the  commercial  classes  of  Assyria  would  be  bitterly 
opposed  to  passing  over  this  revolt. 

In  spite  of  the  evident  importance  of  the  site,  neither 
Rusash  nor  Midas  gave  adequate  support.  A  good  fight 
was  made,  but  the  city  was  at  length  captured,  Pisiris  de- 
throned, and  the  country  made  a  regularly  organized  Assy- 

"Gargamish  in  the  Assyrian.  Johns,  Deeds,  III.  525,  suggests  that 
Gar  here  is  only  a  West  Semitic  form  of  Kar,  "  fortress."  But  the 
whole  make-up  of  the  word  Gargamish  is  Asianic,  not  Semitic. 

"Sargon  only  uses  the  form  Pisiri  but  Tiglath  Pileser  shows  that 
Pisiris  was  used.  This  s  is  clearly  the  nominal  ending.  We  must 
compare  the  ss  of  Asianic  place  names  and  the  curious  T-shaped 
sign  =  j^  on  the  Lygdamis  inscription  from  Halicarnassus.  It  is  inter- 
esting to  find  that  in  certain  forms  of  modem  Greek  5J  or  even  j 
before  i  is  pronounced  sh,  W.  M.  Leake,  Morea,  1830,  I.  XI. 


OF  THE 

(    UNIVERSITY 

V  OF 


86  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

rian  province/^  From  this  time  on,  so  long  as  the  empire 
itself  lasted,  Assyria  held  the  great  western  road.^* 

As  might  be  expected,  the  sack  of  so  great  a  city,  perhaps 
the  most  important  trading  city  of  its  time  in  the  world, 
produced  enormous  booty.  According  to  the  official  ac- 
counts, perhaps  not  to  be  entirely  trusted,  the  value  of  the 
precious  metals  alone  amounted  to  the  huge  sum  of  eleven 
talents  of  gold  and  twenty-one  hundred  of  silver.  Among 
other  valuables  carried  off  and  laid  up  in  Kalhu  against  the 
day  when  they  should  adorn  Dur  Sharrukin  were  bronze, 
ivory,  and  elephant  hides.  Carchemish,  like  other  mercan- 
tile cities,  had  her  army,  perhaps  all  mercenaries.  These 
were  taken  over  in  a  body  and  added  to  the  new  standing 
army.^** 

While  the  danger  to  Assyria  from  a  free  Carchemish  was 
thus  great  and  its  capture  correspondingly  important,  the 
effect  of  its  loss  on  the  Hittite  peoples  has  been  much  exag- 
gerated.^^ No  doubt,  it  was  their  greatest  commercial 
city  and  the  transfer  of  commercial  supremacy  from  an 
allied  to  a  purely  alien  race  made  a  difference.  But  we 
must  remember  that  the  "  Hittite  Empire,"  whatever  it 
really  was,  had  long  been  a  thing  of  the  past  and  that  there 
was  no  organic  union  between  the  petty  Hittite  states  which 
had  taken  its  place.  The  allies  had  been,  not  these  little 
states,  but  the  greater  rulers.  Some  were  brought  under 
Assyrian  control,  others  never  were,  but  all  retained  enough 
individuality  to  influence  considerably  the  later  peoples. 

"A  governor  of  Carchemish  occurs  already  in  691,  Johns,  Deeds,  III. 
228. 

^*A.  46  ff. 

"  N.  21.  This  inscription  seems  to  have  been  erected  especially  to 
commemorate  the  fall  of  Carchemish.  Cf.  also  XIV.  42  ff. ;  A.  49.  As 
the  Maganubba  charter  shows,  actual  work  on  Dur  Sharrukin  was 
begun  in  714. 

"  Especially  by  Maspero,  Empires,  240. 


THE    NORTHWEST    FRONTIER  8/ 

If  Carchemish  was  actually  destroyed  after  the  siege,  it 
did  not  long  remain  in  ruins,  for  it  had  too  important  a 
situation.  Sargon  himself  rebuilt  portions,  as  we  now 
know,^^  while  under  his  successors  it  became,  as  the  relative 
rank  of  its  governors  shows,  one  of  the  greatest  cities  in 
the  empire.  Even  though  many  of  its  inhabitants  had  been 
deported,  it  still  retained  a  large  Hittite  element,  and  this 
mixing  with  Mesopotamian  and  Aramaean  elements,  pro- 
duced a  new  race  of  which  we  should  gladly  know  more. 
In  many  ways  this  new  race  must  have  improved  upon  the 
old.  In  art,  for  example,  if  we  can  judge  from  the  exquisite 
stele  of  the  mother  goddess.^^  We  have  here  the  same  phe- 
nomenon which  we  see  later  in  Asiatic  or  Egyptian  art  of 
the  Greco-Roman  period,  the  old  religious  conceptions  pre- 
served and  reproduced,  but  with  a  temperance  and  a  skill 
of  technique  which  show  superior  artistic  ability.  As  a 
center  of  commerce  its  influence  was  greatest.  It  is  a  sig- 
nificant proof  of  this,  that,  throughout  the  entire  period  of 
the  later  Assyrian  empire,  the  most  important  commercial 
documents  were  reckoned  according  to  the  "mina  of  Car- 
chemish." ^« 

The  fall  of  Carchemish  put  out  of  the  way  a  dangerous 
enemy  in  the  rear  of  the  governor  of  Cilicia.^^    It  was,  there- 

"  The  excavations  carried  on  here  in  1880  revealed  a  room  in  the 
northwest  of  the  acropolis,  where  two  large  Hittite  slabs  were  found 
in  situ.  Here  were  also  found  bricks  built  in  bearing  Sargon's  name. 
These  excavations  have  not,  so  far  as  I  know,  been  further  published, 
at  least  I  know  only  the  account  in  the  London  Graphic,  Dec.  11,  1880, 
582,  abstracted  also  in  Perrot  and  Chipiez,  History  of  Art  in  Sardinia, 
etc.,   1890,  n.  279   ff. 

^*  I  owe  my  knowledge  of  this  to  a  fine  photograph  taken  by  the 
Wolfe  expedition  to  Babylonia,  and  loaned  me  by  Professor   Sterrett. 

"Cf.  Johns,  Expositor,  Nov.,  1899,  398,  and  Deeds,  H.  268  ff.  He 
believes  that  this  Carchemish  mina  of  one  half  the  Assyrian  weight, 
was  a  sort  of  an  actual  coin. 

^  The  reference  in  A.  372  to  the  governor  of  Que  makes  it  probable 
that  all  these  campaigns  were  under  him. 


88  WESTERN   ASIA   IN    THE  DAYS   OF   SARGON 

fore,  possible  for  another  advance  to  be  made  here.  The 
Tyana  road  was,  for  the  time  at  least,  passed  over.  Instead, 
an  attempt  was  to  be  made  (716),^^  directly  on  Iconium 
where  Midas  himself  seems  to  have  had  his  capital.^^  Midas 
called  Rusash  to  his  aid.^^  A  battle  was  fought  near  the  sea- 
coast,  near  the  mouth  of  the  Calycadnus,  and  Sargon  claims 
the  victory.  As  a  result,  several  towns  long  held  by  Midas 
were  conquered  and  added  to  the  province.^*  But  the  main 
object,  the  gaining  of  the  road  to  Iconium,  was  not  se- 
cured.^^  The  inhabitants  of  Cilicia  Trachaea  have  always 
been  wild  and  difficult  to  conquer,  and  so  the  war  dragged 
on  until  at  least  709.^^ 

^  The  Annals  has  this  under  715  but  Prism  B.,  if  I  have  arranged  it 
correctly,  places  it  in  716. 

^A  battle  where  mountain  and  sea  are  close  together  must  have 
been  fought  along  the  coast  road  to  the  southwest  of  Tarsus.  If  so, 
only  two  roads  are  possible.  One  would  be  the  road  which  continues 
along  the  coast,  around  Cilicia  Trachaea,  and  so  to  Pamphilia.  This 
road  is  easily  defended  and  little  used  and  the  villages  along  its  line, 
even  in  Roman  times,  were  probably  of  little  importance.  The  other 
ran  up  the  Calycadnus  river  along  the  line  of  the  one  Roman  road 
through  Cilicia  Trachaea.  At  its  end  is  one  of  the  greatest  cities  of 
eastern  Asia  Minor,  Iconium.  If  this  really  was  the  objective,  who 
but  Midas  would  be  likely  to  hold  it?  Our  data  seem  to  indicate  that 
Midas  had  his  headquarters  not  far  from  the  actual  seat  of  operations. 
Our  scanty  notices  of  Phrygia  in  the  Greek  sources  seem  to  bear  this 
theory  out.  Iconium  is  the  last  town  of  Phrygia  according  to  Xen., 
Anab.,  I.  2.  19.  Here  also,  according  to  Steph.  Byz.,  5.  v.  Ikonion, 
and  Suidas,  s.  v.  Nannakos,  ruled  the  prehistoric  Phrygian  king  and  hero 
Nannakos.  If  these  mean  anything  at  all,  do  they  not  imply  a  vague 
idea  that  Iconium  once  had  been  the  capitol  of  Phrygia?  If  so,  where 
is  a  better  time  than  the  one  we  are  dealing  with  ? 

^  So  Prism  B. 

'*The  names  of  Harrua,  Ushnanish,  Ab-?-a-?  are  preserved.  None 
have  been  identified. 

*A.  92-94,  99-100.  The  Annals  is  badly  mutilated  here.  Winckler, 
Sargon,  XXV  n.",  connects  C.  21,  the  pacification  of  Que. 

'•A.  372. 


THE    NORTHWEST    FRONTIER  89 

In  714"  Sargon  definitely  took  up  the  question  of  advance 
in  this  region.  Once  more,  as  in  718,  the  road  through  the 
CiHcian  Gates  was  taken.  Matti  of  Tyana  had  recognized 
the  real  meaning  of  the  Assyrian  policy  and  had  gone  over 
to  Midas.2®    He  was  now  attacked  and  deposed. 

Sargon  moved  on  to  the  north  and  attacked  the  Tabal 
clan  of  Bit  Buritash.^®  Here  a  certain  HulH  had  ruled  in 
the  days  of  Tiglath  Pileser.^°  On  his  death  Sargon  recog- 
nized his  son,  Ambaris,^^  as  his  successor  and,  to  bind  him 
more  closely  to  his  cause,  gave  him  his  daughter,  Ahata- 
bisha.^2  He  also  granted  to  him  Hilakku  (Cilicia),  which  at 
this  time  was  north  of  the  Taurus,  about  where  the  later 

^^  I  have  followed  the  date  of  Prism  B.      Annals  gives  one  year  later. 

^*  Prism  B.      S.  2022  II  Matti  of  Atuna  trusted  [Mita]   the  Musician. 

^  The  forms  are  Bit  Buritash  and  Burutash.  P.  Jensen,  Hittiter  und 
Armenier,  1898,  117,  compares  the  Soruth  and  Voruth  of  Hiibschmann's 
list,  Festgruss  an  Rudolf  Roth,  1893,  100,  as  well  as  the  Uorodes  of  the 
Parthians.  None  are  probable,  and  the  possibility  rests  on  the  Iranian 
character  of  the  Hittites.  The  location  is  clearly  on  the  Tyana-Mazaka 
road  and  between  the  two,  cf.  the  modern  Bor.  Winckler,  Forsch.,  II. 
121,  makes  Bit  Buritash  to  have  the  hegemony  over  all  Tabal.  This  is 
unlikely. 

^  Clay  inscription,  Rev.  15. — For  Hulli  names,  cf.  Johns,  Deeds,  III. 
460.  Halevy,  Rev.  Semitique,  1893,  132,  compares  the  Ollis  of  the  in- 
scriptions and  Olymbros,  "  01  is  king,"  found,  however,  not  in  Hesychius, 
but  in  Steph.  Byz.,  ^.  v.,  Adana.  Cf.  the  01  names  of  Asia  Minor 
cities.  Jensen,  Hittiter,  116,  identifies  it  with  the  Glak  of  Hiibsch- 
mann's list,  but  a  reference  to  the  introduction  prefixed  to  the  translation 
of  Zenob  of  Glag  in  V.  Langlois,  Historiens  de  I'Armenie,  1880,  I.  335, 
shows  that  Glag  is  not  Armenian  at  all. 

"  The  name  occurs  as  Ambaris,  Amris,  Ambaridi.  Jensen,  op.  cit., 
82,  finds  here  two  separate  stems.  The  real  name  is  Am-ba-ri-is.  In 
Amris,  the  sign  ba  was  omitted  by  mistake.  In  Ambaridi,  the  di  is 
simply  is  with  the  last  half  of  the  ri  repeated  by  dittography.  Pro- 
fessor Sterrett  compares  the  place  name  Ambar  Arasii. 

"^  So  Winckler,  Forsch.,  I.  365  n.'.  Ahat  abisha  is  a  princess  of 
Tabal  who  sends  news  to  Sargon  through  her  steward,  K.  181.  She 
would  now  be  queen  mother. 


90  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

strategeia  of  Cilicia  was  situated,^^  although  it  is  quite 
possible  that  he  simply  gave  him  the  privilege  of  conquering 
it,  if  he  could. 

The  royal  lady  seems  to  have  been  unable  to  keep  her 
husband  true.  He,  too,  went  over  to  Midas  and  Rusash.^"* 
But,  as  usual,  they  proved  broken  reeds  to  lean  upon,  for 
Ambaris  was  captured  and  carried  off  with  all  his  father's 
house.  One  hundred  chariots  were  impressed  into  the  royal 
army,  the  leading  citizens  were  deported,  and  prisoners  from 
other  quarters  settled  in  their  place.  Then,  after  Tabal  had 
been  thoroughly  ravaged,  a  governor  was  placed  over  it, 
and  the  country  was  made  an  Assyrian  province.^^ 

This  campaign  had  opened  up  the  Tarsus-Tyana-Mazaka 
road  to  the  Halys  River,  which  would  thus  form  the  northern 
boundary  of  the  province  to  be  established.    Along  the  west, 

*^  The  identity  of  Hilakku  with  Cilicia  is  proved  by  the  coins  bearing 
the  legend  HLK  issued  by  the  Persian  satraps  of  Cilicia,  cf.  B.  Head, 
Historia  Nummorum,  1887,  613. — For  the  earlier  location  of  Cilicia 
north  of  the  Taurus,  see  Herod.  I.  72  ;  V.  52 ;  Strabo  XIV.  5.  24,  and 
cf.  the  note  by  Niese,  in  Jensen,  Hittiter,  195  f.  For  the  later 
strategeia  of  Cilicia,  in  Cappadocia,  cf.  Ramsay,  op.  cit.,  303.  Its 
location  is  well  shown  by  K.  11490  =  Knudtzon  60  where  the  Tabalai 
ana  Hilikai  are  about  to  invade  Que,  the  Cilicia  of  later  times.  It  is 
not  necessary  with  Winckler,  Forsch.,  II.  12,  to  assume  a  former 
Assyrian  conquest  of  Cilicia.  Rulers  often  give  away  what  they  do 
not  possess. 

^  According  to  the  Assyrian  scribe,  Rusash  had  been  dead  a  year. 
Does  this  mention  of  him  here  imply  a  slip  on  the  part  of  the  scribe, 
betraying  what  we  know  from  Haldian  sources,  the  fact  that  Rusash 
was  still  alive? 

"'A.  168  ff.',  D.  29  if. — What  Bit  Buritash  sha  Bit  Akukanina  means 
is  not  clear. — Winckler,  Forsch.,  1.  366,  believes  that  the  new  province 
was  not  united  to  Que.  But  such  a  connection  of  Cilicia,  which  be- 
longs rather  to  Syria  than  to  Asia  Minor,  with  a  legion  across  the 
Taurus  is  against  the  analogy  drawn  from  later  history.  It  is  true 
that  we  have  no  mention  of  such  a  province  elsewhere,  but  this  is  not 
strange,  for  the  Assyrian  hqldings  in  Cappadocia  seem  to  have  been 
soon  lost. 


THE    NORTHWEST    FRONTIER  9 1 

Lake  Tatta  would  serve  as  a  boundary,  but  to  the  south  of 
that  the  ground  would  be  debatable.  To  the  east,  the  Eu- 
phrates would  naturally  be  taken,  for  Haldia  had  now  with- 
drawn behind  that  river.  Thus  the  new  province  could  be 
given,  on  nearly  every  side,  a  boundary  which  might  be 
truly  called  "  scientific."  It  was  to  the  securing  of  this  fron- 
tier that  the  operations  of  the  next  year  were  directed. 

The  greater  part  of  this  coveted  territory  was  known  as 
Kammanu.  Its  name  was  derived,  no  doubt,  from  the  old 
sacred  city  of  Comana,  which  was  situated  in  the  bare  desert 
cleft  in  the  western  part  of  this  region.^^  At  present,  the 
capital  was  Meliddu,  which  has  always  been,  both  as  the 
classical  Melitene  and  the  Malatia  of  modern  times,  the 
center  of  a  great  road-complex  and  therefore  a  position  of 
importance.^^  Some  time  before  this,  a  certain  Gunzinanu 
had  been  deposed,^*  and  Tarhunazi  had  taken  his  place.^^ 

^  The  earliest  reference  to  Kammanu  is  to  be  found,  with  Winckler, 
Gesch.,  246,  in  the  Qumani  of  Tiglath  Pileser  I,  Prism,  V.  82.  Since 
Delattre,  L'Asie,  65,  this  has  been  seen  to  be  connected  with  Comana. 
Winckler  and  Billerbeck  on  their  maps  confine  Kammanu  to  the  region 
about  Comana.  If  Meliddu  really  is  the  capital  of  Kammanu,  then 
it  must  have  extended  much  further  to  the  east.  While  Comana 
has  not  easy  communications  with  the  east,  still  the  extension  of  the 
name  would  be  in  this  direction  rather  than  to  the  west  where  we 
have  the  huge  Mt.  Argaeus  completely  blocking  the  way,  as  Professor 
Sterrett  points  out  to  me. 

^^  Meliddu  is  the  Milidia  of  Tiglath  Pileser  I,  Prism  V.  34.  For  the 
Greek  Melitene,  see  Ramsay,  Hist.  Geog.,  313  ;  for  the  Haldian  Helita, 
Sayce,  XXXIII,  16,  etc.;  for  the  Arab  Malatiyah,  Le  Strange,  East. 
Caliph.,  120;  for  recent  change  of  site,  J.  R,  S.  Sterrett,  Epigraphical 
Journey,  1888,  300. — 83-1-18,  41  =  H.  375,  also  Harper,  Amer.  Jour. 
Sem.  Lang.,  1897,  is  a  horse  tablet  from  Nabu  shum  iddin,  and  refers 
to  horses  from  the  land  of  Melitai. 

^*  Jensen,  op.  cit.,  compares  the  Kuntsik  of  Hiibschmann's  list,  105, 
and,  for  the  latter  part,  the  -nesis  in  Syennesis,  etc. 

^®  Cf.  the  Tarhunazi  of  K.  301  =  J.  308,  who  lived  in  the  reign  of 
Ashur  bani  pal.      The  first  part  is  clearly  the  god  Tarhu.      For  the  Greek 


92  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

Sargon  had  recognized,  if  not  encouraged,  the  change,  and 
had  added  some  lands.  When  Ambaris  revolted,  Tarhunazi 
seems  to  have  followed  his  example,  at  least  so  far  as  to 
withhold  his  tribute.  The  advance  on  Meliddu  seems  to 
have  been  made  from  Amida  as  a  base.  Kammanu  was 
devastated  and  the  capital  taken.  Tarhunazi  fled  westward 
to  his  strong  fortress  of  Tulgarimmu,  the  Biblical  Togor- 
mah,***  where  he  was  besieged  and  forced  to  surrender.  He 
was  cast  into  chains,  and,  with  wife,  children,  and  five 
thousand  troops,  carried  off  to  Ashur,  where  the  party  was 
settled." 

The  required  lines  had  now  been  secured,  at  least  after  a 
fashion,  and  the  subjugation  of  the  less  important  interior 
might  be  left  to  time.  The  frontier  itself  needed  fortifica- 
tion. First  Tulgarimmu  was  rebuilt  with  Meliddu.  Then 
three  forts  were  erected  on  the  west  against  Midas,  two  on 
the  north  as  protection  against  the  barbarians,  and  five  along 
the  Euphrates  on  the  Haldian  frontier.'*^    The  space  thus 

Tarko  names,  cf.  Sachau,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  1892,  90  if.;  for  a  con- 
nection with  the  Biblical  Terah,  Jensen,  ib.,  1892,  70;  for  the  Kashshite 
Turgu,  Hilprecht,  ib.,  1892,  317  n.  Nazi  is  frequent  in  Kashshite, 
Hilprecht,  /.  c,  cf.  also  Tarmanazi,  Tiglath  Pileser  III,  A.  144.  Jensen, 
Hittiter,  202,  curiously  enough,  refuses  to  see  Hittite  names  at  all  in 
Tarhunazi  and  Tarhulara. 

*"  Halevy,  Rev.  Critique,  1881,  483,  has  made  this  identification  and 
it  has  generally  been  followed.  Professor  Sterrett  points  out  to  me 
that  Derende,  the  classical  Dalanda,  cf.  Ramsay,  Hist.  Geog.,  309,  where 
we  have  a  fine  and  almost  impregnable  castle  of  later  date,  see  Sterrett, 
Epig.  Jour.,  301,  would  be  a  fine  site.  It  would  be  on  a  natural  line 
up  the  Tokhma  Su, — Professor  Sterrett  himself  followed  this  road, — 
is  due  west  of  Melitene,  and  is  on  the  way  to,  and  not  far  from,  Gurun, 
the  classical  Guraina,  cf.  Ramsay,  op.  cit.,  309,  the  Guriana  of  the 
letters,  Sayce,  Proc.  Soc.  Bibl.  Arch.,  1903,  148.  Winckler  and 
Billerbeck,  on  their  maps,  place  Tulgarimmu  at  Gurun  itself. 

"A.  178  ^.;  D.  78  if. 

"  The  location  of  these  forts  is  very  important,  as  by  their  aid  we  can 
gain  a  very  definite  idea  of  the  boundary  at  this  time.      Usi,  the  Uesi 


THE    NORTHWEST    FRONTIER  93 

enclosed,  a  wedge  thrust  forward  between  Haldia  and 
Phrygia,  was  made  a  province  under  the  usual  forms  of 
administration  and  settled  by  captives  from  various  parts  of 
the  empire,  the  last  instalment  of  Sute  not  arriving  until 
after  the  capture  of  Babylon  (710).*^ 

of  the  letters,  is  probably  the  Euaissai,  Avisai  of  Notitiae  III,  X,  XIII, 
quoted  Ramsay,  op.  cit.,  283,  the  Euaisse  of  the  Notitia  published  by 
Gelzer,  Milnchen  Abhandl.  Philos.-phil.  Classe,  1901,  551,  and  the 
Euaisenoi  to  whom  Basil  of  Caesarea  sent  Epistle  CCLI.  Cf.  also  the 
Uschi  of  the  Holy  Legend,  Jan.  31,  quoted  by  Mordtmann,  Zeitschr. 
Deutsch.  Morg.  GeselL,  1877,  423,  Ramsay,  op.  cit.,  305  identifies  it 
with  Yogounnes.  This  is  rather  far  north  of  the  Halys,  but  is  not 
entirely  out  of  the  question.  The  Usi-ilu  of  Winckler's  edition  should 
be  read  Usian,  the  Uasaun  of  K.  181.  It  is  clearly  the  Osiana  of  the 
Antonine  Itinerary,  206.  Ramsay,  op.  cit.,  295,  sees  in  the  name  only 
a  corruption  of  Soanda  which  he  places  at  Nev  Sheher.  But  Kiepert, 
both  in  his  wall  map  of  Asia  Minor,  1888,  and  in  his  Atlas  Antiquus, 
places  Osiana  to  the  northwest  of  Soanda,  and  this  separate  existence 
seems  to  be  proved  by  this  Assyrian  form.  In  Uargin,  we  probably 
have  a  form  akin  to  Argaios  or  Argos,  Steph.  Byz.,  s.  v.,  which  Ramsay, 
op.  cit.,  353,  believes  to  be  the  word  for  mountain  in  the  native  dialect. 
I  would  locate  this,  not  at  the  better  known  Mt.  Argaios,  the  present 
Arjish,  but  rather  in  the  Mt.  Argaios,  the  modern  Hassan  Dagh,  south- 
east of  Lake  Tatta.  This  would  be  half  way  between  Tyana  and  Osiana 
and  would  furnish  a  very  good  frontier  line.  I  cannot  make  any  sug- 
gestion as  to  the  two  forts,  Ellibir  and  Shindarara,  erected  on  the  north 
boundary.  On  the  east  boundary,  the  Euphrates  must  have  been  be- 
tween the  new  province  and  Haldia.  Luhsu  might  be  the  Leugaisa  of 
Ptol.  V.  6.  21,  but  this  is  inland  and  to  the  southwest  of  Melitene.  I 
rather  prefer  Dagusa  of  the  same  section  which  was  on  the  Euphrates 
and  north  of  Melitene.  Delta  for  lambda  is  a  common  error,  while 
a  guttural  g  would  naturally  be  represented  in  Assyrian  by  h.  It  is 
only  fair  to  state,  however,  that  Dagusa  may  be  an  error  for  Daskusa. 
Budir,  Anmurru,  and  Anduarsalia  are  unknown.  With  the  place  Ki — , 
we  may  compare  the  Kiakis  of  Ptol.,  /.  c,  the  Ciaca  XVIII  m.  p.  north 
of  Melitene  of  the  Antonine  Itinerary.  Uargin  is  identified  with 
Guraina  by  Jensen,  Zeitschr.  Deutsch.  Morg.  GeselL,  1894,  47 1>  and 
Winckler,  Forsch.,  II.  135,  but  there  is  no  phonetic  basis,  and  Guraina 
must  be  reserved  for  Guriana. 

"Jensen,  Rec.  de  Trav.,  1896,   116,  restores  A.   195   a\di   {mat)   nagi 
Isha    limitsu   ana'\    Mutallu    Qummuhai   addin,    "  with   the    surrounding 


94  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

The  next  year  an  opportunity  came  for  securing  the  most 
important  site  in  the  interior  still  unconquered.     At  Mar- 
regions,   I   gave   to   Mutallu   of  Qummuh."      The   addin,   "  I    gave "    is 
extremely  doubtful  on  the  original ;  in  fact,  no  definite  reading  can  be 
given.      The  use  of  addin  can  therefore  only  be  defended  by  appealing 
to  its  naturalness  in  the  light  of  other  events.      But  it  is  very  unlikely 
that  Sargon  gave  lan^  to  one  who  is  so  clearly  an  enemy  as  Mutallu. 
It  is  more  probable  that  the  Mutallu  began  a  new  paragraph,  the  re- 
mainder of  which  was  on  the  lost  slab  between  A.   195  and  A.  196,  cf. 
Winckler,    Sargon,    33    n. — In    the    text,    I    have    followed    what    seems 
the  natural   order  of  events.      According  to  this  view,   Meliddu  is  the 
capital  of  Kammanu.      Gunzinanu,  the  former  king,  A.   188  if.;   D.  83, 
according  to  whose  quota  the  new  province  was  taxed,  seems  to  have 
been  the  predecessor  of  Tarhunazi.      According  to  XIV.  9-10;   P.  IV. 
23-27,  he  was  deposed  and  carried  off  from   Meliddu,   his   royal   city. 
This  is  probably  true.      The  further  statement,  however,  that  a  governor 
was  appointed,  cannot  stand  in  the  face  of  A.   180  f.,  where  it  is  said 
that   he    granted   this    land    to    Tarhunazi.       Winckler,    Sargon,    XXIX, 
on  the  other  hand,  argues  that  Tarhunazi,  ruler  of  Meliddu,  drove  out 
Gunzinanu  of  Kammana  and  annexed  Kammanu  to  Meliddu.      In  this, 
he  is  followed  by   Maspero,  Empires,   252   n.    i,   and   Rogers,   History, 
II.   168.      Yet  Winckler  still  translates  A.   180   as  before,  Forsch.,  II. 
132,  and  this  states  that  Sargon  himself  deposed  Gunzinanu  and  placed 
Tarhunazi  on  the  vacant  throne.      Nor  do  I  see  that  D.  83  and  A.  189 
to   which   he   appeals,   prove   his   case.       They   simply   prove   that   there 
was  an  earlier  king,  Gunzinanu.      But  it  is  the  use  of  the  place  names 
which  is  most  troublesome,  if  we  accept  Winckler's  theory.      We  would 
then  have  Meliddu,  which  is  always  a  city,  not  a  country,  the  capital 
(A.,   183)    of  an   unknown  land,   ruled  by  Tarhunazi,   while  a   land   of 
Kammanu  has  no  known  capital,  and  for  king  we  must  take  Gunzinanu 
who    is    distinctly    said    to    be    an    earlier    king.       It    assumes    that   the 
accounts  in  XIV  and  P.  IV  are  entirely  wrong  and  that  that  in  A.  is 
half  incorrect.      This  may  be  true,   but  we  demand   some   evidence   as 
well  as  a  consideration  of  the   facts  mentioned   above. — The   conquests 
in   this   region   were   only   temporary    and   perhaps    were    largely    swept 
away  by  the  barbarian  wars  at  the  close  of  the  reign.      Already  in  his 
fifth   campaign,   Sennacherib  was  forced  again  to   destroy  Tulgarimmu, 
Constantinople  Ins.,  19.      No  eponym  of  Meliddu  is  known,  but  Assyria 
seems  to  have  held  it  till  the  later  days  of  Esarhaddon,  when,  as  we 
learn  from  the  prayers  to  the  sun  god,  Knudtzon  54  if.,  it  passed  into 
the  hands   of  Mugallu  of  Tabal. 


THE    NORTHWEST    FRONTIER  95 

qasi/*  the  modern  Mar'ash,  the  Hittite  ruler,  Tarhulara,*^ 
had  been  murdered  by  his  anti-Assyrian  son,  Mutallu.  Sar- 
gon,  however,  took  him  prisoner, — armies  could  easily  be 
concentrated  on  him  from  several  sides,*^ — and  carried  him 
off  with  all  the  tribe  of  Bit  Pa'alla  and  much  booty.  Gur- 
gume,*'^  from  which  Tarhulara  had  come,  was  rebuilt,  and 
an  Assyrian  governor  installed  in  Marqasi.*^ 

**  A  governor  of  Marqasi  is  known  in  682,  and  in  680,  Johns,  Deeds ; 

II.  136.  For  the  classical  Gernianiceia,  cf.  Ramsay,  Hist.  Geog.,  297. 
In  later  times,  it  became  Mar'ash,  the  change  from  qoph  to  'ain  being, 
as  Mr.  B.  B.  Charles  points  out  to  me,  fairly  common  in  certain  dia- 
lects of  the  Syrian  Arabic  of  to-day.  The  form  Mersin  is  common 
among  the  writers  on  the  Crusades  but  a  curious  instance  of  survival  of 
the  older  form  with  qoph  is  to  be  found  in  Anna  Comnena,  XI.  329  ; 
XIII.  413  where  a  genitive  Markeos  occurs.  The  editors  of  the  Rec. 
de  I'Hist.  des  Croisades,  Hist.  Grec,  II.  59  have  rightly  seen  that  it  was 
connected  with  Mar'ash,  but  probably  were  unaware  of  the  Assyrian 
form. 

*^  The  first  part  is  Tarhu,  cf.  n.  39.  For  the  second,  Jensen,  Hittiter, 
22^,  compares  the  Mongerlaris  of  Heberdey  and  Wilhelm,  Abhandl. 
of  Vienna  Academy,  1896,  138  ^.  I  was  inclined  to  identify  the  name 
with  the  Tourkoleis  of  Sachau,  op.  cit.,  99,  but  a  reference  to  the 
original  inscription,  no.  LXXV,  of  Hicks,  Jour,  of  Hellen.  Studies,  1891, 
shows  that  we  really  have  Toukoleis.  The  rho  is  probably  merely  a 
misreading  of  the  division  line  in  the  transliteration. 

"  From  Melitene,  Samosata,  Samal,  Carchemish,  Tarsus,  all  of  which 
were  in  the  hands  of  Assyria.  This  shows  how  necessary  it  was  to 
take  the  country  which  lay  in  the  center  of  the  half  circle. 

"  Gurgume  already  appears  in  the  Monolith,  I.  40,  II.  84,  of  Shal- 
maneser  II.  It  is  then  ruled  by  an  earlier  Mutallu.  For  an  ex- 
haustive account  of  the  Arabic  Gurgume,  see  Sachau,  Sitzungsherichte 
of  the  Berlin  Academy,  1892,  329  fF.  Sachau  there  compares  the 
GRGM  of  the  Panammu  inscription.  The  identity  with  Mar'ash  seems 
to  have  been  independently  discovered  by  Tomkins,  Bah.  Orient.  Record, 

III.  3,  and  Sachau,  op.  cit.,  313.  Professor  Sterrett  suggests  that  we 
may  have  a  trace  of  the  root  in  Gulgurum,  the  classical  Gorgorome, 
near  Fassiler  where  Hittite  remains  are  found. 

*^  In  the  text,  the  version  of  A.  208  ff. ;  D.  83  if.  is  followed.  Ac- 
cording to  XIV.  10;  P.  IV.  28;  B.  26;  Tarhulara  was  deposed  directly 
by  Sargon   and  Gurgume  is   at  once  made  a  province.      This  does  not 


g6  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

In  the  next  years,  probably  711-709,  the  final  pacification 
of  Que  proper  was  accomplished  by  its  governor.  In  three 
expeditions*®  the  infantry  penetrated  the  Taurus,  took  two 
fortresses  situated  on  hilltops  and  made  twenty-four  hun- 
dred prisoners.  Of  these,  nearly  a  thousand  were  carried 
the  whole  length  of  the  empire  from  Que  to  the  king,  as  he 
lay  encamped  at  Irma'mi  in  Elam.^^  To  take  their  place 
other  Assyrian  subjects  were  settled.''^  But  it  now  began  to 
be  seen  that  a  crossing  of  Cilicia  Trachaea  was  impracticable, 
and  the  advance  was  stopped.  It  is  even  probable  that  some 
sort  of  an  understanding  with  Midas  was  arrived  at,  for  in 
no  other  way  can  we  explain  the  "  tribute  "  Sargon  claims 
to  have  received  from  him.'^^ 

necessarily  conflict  with  the  other,  for,  if  Mutallu  deposed  his  father 
at  Assyrian  suggestion,  Sargon  would  claim  it.  But  Mutallu  would 
seem  to  represent  the  anti-Assyrian  party.  Then  we  can  explain  Sar- 
gon's  boast  only  in  the  light  of  the  usual  tendency  of  the  Assyrians  to 
"  claim  everything  in  sight."  I  think  that  this  Mutallu  was  not  the 
same  as  the  Mutallu  of  Qummuh,  although  I  know  the  reverse  may  be 
argued.  Winckler  restores  A.  209  (V)  "  Hull[i  Mut]tallu  his  son." 
What  can  this  possibly  mean  ? — For  the  fact  of  Hittite  occupation,  cf. 
the  well-known  Mar'ash  lion  with  the  Hittite  inscription.  Here  is 
probably  to  be  placed  82-3-23,  131,  published  and  translated,  Winckler, 
Forsch.,  II.  570  if.  Winckler  has  seen  that  the  second  part  refers 
to  the  Ashdod  revolt.  He  places  the  first  part  in  Armenia,  but  the 
relation  to  the  Ashdod  revolt  account  seems  rather  to  refer  to  our 
own  events.  The  mountain  top  like  a  dagger  point  where  the  cliff  fort 
Azaqa  was  situated  may  as  well  be  found  in  Asia  Minor.  Azaka  has 
a  "  Hittite  "  sound  and  if  we  compare  Caesarea  Mazaka,  we  may  place 
the  mountain  top  at  the  nearby  Mt.  Argaios. 

*'A.  373,  cf.  Winckler,  op.  cit.,  II.  133. 

""A.  378.  K.  833  =  J.  1099  seems  to  belong  here.  It  is  a  report 
of  various  classes  of  captives  who  have  been  brought  from  Que.  The 
total  is  976,  as  against  the  1000  of  the  Annals,  a  better  showing  for 
accuracy  than  we  should  expect. 

"  K.  3061  =  J.  743  shows  that  Assyrian  colonists  were  settled  in  Que 
probably  at  this  time. 

"A.  379  if.      A  governor  of  Que  in  685,  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  137. 


THE    NORTHWEST    FRONTIER  9/ 

At  about  the  same  time  or  perhaps  a  little  later,''^  trouble 
broke  out  on  the  extreme  north,  where  Mutallu  of  Qummuh, 
a  land  situated  somewhat  to  the  north  of  the  later  Comma- 
gene,^*  had  abandoned  friendly  relations  with  Sargon  and 
gone  over  to  Argishtish,  who  had  recently  succeeded  Rusash 
in  Haldia.  The  governor  of  the  new  province  invaded  his 
country,  took  some  of  his  fortresses  and  much  booty,  and 
even  some  of  his  family.  But  Mutallu  himself  simply  re- 
tired to  the  wild  mountains  nearby.  The  lowland  regions 
were  settled  by  captives  from  Bit  lakin,  to  which  place  the 
Qummuh  men  were  in  their  turn  deported.*^^    This  seems  to 

"The  exact  date  is  uncertain.  In  both  Rm,  2,  97  and  II  R.  69,  we 
have  a  campaign  against  Qummuh  under  708,  and  this  is  the  more 
probable  date.  Winckler,  Sargon,  XLI,  has  shown  that  a  date  cannot 
be  inserted  before  the  Qummuh  campaign  in  the  Annals.  The  date  in 
that  document  would  then  be  709.  If  there  were  a  real  question  of 
date,  we  should  prefer  that  of  the  chronological  documents.  In  reality, 
we  are  probably  to  see  here  a  series  of  guerilla  wars,  extending  over 
several  years.  Cf.  the  mention  of  Mutallu  of  Qummuh  in  A.  195 
under  712. 

"Qummuh  occurs  already  in  the  time  of  Tiglath  Pileser  I,  Prism, 
I.  59.  The  connection  with  the  classical  Commagene  is  generally 
recognized.  In  these  days,  it  seems  to  have  been  further  north.  Its 
site  at  this  time  seems  to  be  marked  by  the  fortress  of  Kamacha, 
Ramsay,  Hist.  Geog.,  448.  This  is  the  Kamakh  of  the  Arabs,  Le 
Strange,  East.  Caliph.,  118.  It  might  be  objected  that  an  Assyrian 
qoph  can  hardly  be  represented  by  the  Arabic  kaph.  But  the  Assyrian 
qoph  is  properly  transliterated  by  the  Greek  kappa,  while  this  is  again 
represented  correctly,  if  the  Arabic  form  came  directly  from  the  Greek 
and  not  from  the  native  form. — Mutallu  also  occurs  on  the  Monolith 
of  Shalmaneser  II,  I.  40.  We  cannot  with  Sachau,  /.  c,  and  Johns, 
Deeds,  III.  458,  compare  the  Motales  of  Hicks,  op.  cit.,  27,  40  for 
Heberdey  and  Wilhelm,  op.  cit.,  no  155,  show  this  to  be  a  misreading. 
Jensen,  op.  cit.,  223,  compares  the  Moutalaske  of  the  Vita  Sahce,  cited  by 
Ramsay,  Hist.  Geog.,  295. 

•"  The  list  of  tribute  is  instructive.      It  included  horses,  mules,  asses, 

camels,  herds  and  flocks,  gold,  silver,  various  cloths,   elephants*  hides, 

ivory,  ushu  and  ukarinu  wood,  the  treasures  of  his  palace,  and  his  royal 

throne.       The    mention    of    camels    and    elephants    in    this    locality    is 

7 


98  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

be  the  high-water  mark  of  Assyrian  influence  in  this  region. 
Before  the  end  of  the  reign  the  Iranians  began  to  come  in 
and  the  frontier  receded.^^ 

In  connection  with  affairs  on  this  frontier,  we  may  note 
the  Assyrian  relations  with  Cyprus.  Here  the  Greeks  had 
gradually  been  settling  until  by  now  they  seem  to  have 
gained  control  of  the  greater  part  of  the  island.  They  nat- 
urally, as  enemies  of  the  Phoenicians  in  the  island,  were 
inclined  to  be  friendly  with  the  Assyrians  who  had  already 
secured  control  of  the  Phoenicians  on  the  mainland.  No 
doubt,  too,  Midas  had  tried  to  conquer  the  Greeks  along  the 
coast,  as  the  Lydians  tried  later,  and  enmity  to  him  would 
again  make  them  favorable  to  Sargon.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  Assyrians  had  no  fleet,  and  so  there  was  little  danger  of 
conquest  from  them.  Furthermore,  friendship  with  the 
great  empire  would  mean  commercial  privileges  throughout 
the  whole  of  its  provinces,  and  the  Greeks  would  not  forget 
this.  We  can  therefore  well  understand  why,  when  Sargon 
was  still  in  Babylon,  probably  after  his  return  from  the 
extreme  south  (709),^^  he  received  an  embassy  and  presents, 

curious.  Were  camels  used  for  caravans?  It  is  well  known  that  large 
numbers  of  beautiful  rugs  are  still  made  at  home  in  Asia  Minor.  Does 
the  mention  of  these  various  cloths  point  to  home  manufacture  of  such 
a  sort  at  this  time? 

We  learn  further  of  this  production  of  cloth  in  K.  125  =  H.  196, 
Johns,  Laws,  345,  which  dates  about  708,  cf.  chap.  VIII.  The  heads  of 
Qummuh  have  come  to  Kalhu  where  they  are  lodged  in  the  house 
reserved  for  that  nation.  They  bear  tribute,  seven  mares  of  mules 
each  and  fruit  as  well  as  cloth  and  seven  talents,  apparently  some  sort 
of  a  tax  on  that  product.  They  are  discontented  at  present  conditions, 
say  their  produce  has  decreased  under  present  circumstances,  and  wish 
the  work  to  be  under  the  direction  of  the  royal  weavers. 

'^''A.  372  if.,  D.  112  if. 

"  A.  388.  The  order  of  the  Annals  calls  for  709.  Maspero,  Empires, 
260,  and  Rogers,  History,  178  prefer  708,  while  Winckler,  Sargon,  XL 
advocates  710. 


THE    NORTHWEST    FRONTIER  99 

gold  and  silver, — it  is  curious  that  we  have  no  mention  of 
the  copper  which  received  its  name  from  the  island, — ushu 
and  ukarinu  woods,  from  the  land  of  la',^^  a  region^®  of 
latnana,  as  the  Assyrians  named  Cyprus.^^    In  return,  Sar- 

^  The  land  la'  should  be  compared  with  the  Cilician  names  of 
Sachau,  op.  cit.,  1891,  81,  lazamos  and  lanbies  where  la  is  a  god,  Jensen, 
Hittiter,  126.  Johns,  Deeds,  III,  122,  compares  the  witness  la-ai  of  K. 
422  — J.  75. 

'^  The  Assyrian  for  "  region  "  is  Nage.  Winckler,  Sargon,  XL  n.  6, 
makes  la'nage  a  folk  etymology  from  an  lonikoi,  or,  as  modified,  Farsch., 
I,  367  n.  I,  for  lonike.  No  form  of  Ionian  occurs  in  any  of  the 
Cypriote  inscriptions  in  Collitz,  Sammlung  der  griech.  Dialekt-In- 
schriften,  I.  1884,  or  in  any  of  the  Semitic  inscriptions  from  Cyprus 
given  in  the  Corpus.  Pape's  Handworterbuch  does  not  give  a  single 
instance  where  lonikoi  is  used  for  lones  or  where  lonike  is  used  for 
Ionia.  I  have  indeed  found  a  statement  in  Steph.  Byz.  s.  v.  Ionia,  to  the 
effect  that  lonikoi  is  a  form  used  of  natives  of  Ionia,  but  a  reference 
to  his  use  of  lonikoi  as  applied  to  the  Illyrians,  s.  v.  las,  seems  to 
show  that  its  use  for  lones  is  the  result  of  a  confusion.  I  therefore 
doubt  if  lonikoi  was  ever  used  for  lones  or  lonike  for  Ionia.  If  so 
used,  it  must  have  been  very  rare,  since  no  certain  trace  is  left. 
Winckler's  clever  conjecture  is  accordingly  not  supported  by  Hellenic 
usage.  But  there  is  a  more  serious  objection.  In  all  forms  of  the 
root,  a  digamma  was  felt  as  the  Hebrew  Javan,  Arabic  Yunani,  Sanskrit 
lavana  show.  This  digamma  was  felt  in  Cypriote,  as  their  inscriptions 
indicate.  In  Assyrian,  as  the  name  of  the  Ashdod  leader,  lamani,  shows, 
this  w  sound,  as  usual,  was  represented  by  m.  It  is  difficult  to  believe, 
at  least  I  know  of  no  examples  to  prove  it,  that  the  sign  which  repre- 
sents the  lost  guttural  sounds  in  Assyrian  could  stand  for  a  digamma. 
If  it  could,  it  ought  to  appear  before,  not  after,  the  a  which  I  suppose 
Winckler  would  make  correspond  to  the  o  of  lonikes-Ionike. 

*•  The  form  Atnana  is  probably  merely  a  scribal  error,  the  la  before 
at  being  lost  through  similarity  of  signs,  Sachau,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr,  1888, 
112.  Perhaps  Cheyne,  Ency.  Biblica.  art.  Javan,  is  right  in  thinking 
that  the  explanation  "  Ionian  island "  is  mere  folk  etymology.  It  is 
even  more  probable  that  there  is  no  actual  connection  between  it  and 
lones.  Oppert,  Literatur-Blatt  fur  Orient.  Philologie,  III.  82  fF. 
identifies  the  word  with  Itanus,  a  place  in  eastern  Crete.  While  this 
is  impossible,  the  agreement  in  names  may  perhaps  indicate  that  the 
inhabitants  of  Crete  before  the  coming  of  either  Phoenician  or  Greek 
were  of  the  same  Eteocretic  race  as  those  in  Cyprus. 


lOO  WESTERN    ASIA   IN    THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

gon  sent  to  Cyprus  the  splendid  "  image  of  his  majesty," 
which  is  now  in  BerUn.®^  The  Greeks  of  Cyprus  continued 
to  keep  in  friendly  relation  with  succeeding  kings,  and  once 
in  a  while  sent  presents.  To  the  end,  however,  they  retained 
their  independence  and  Assyria  never  really  ruled  the 
island.®^ 

"  S.  43-47-      Cf.  chap.  I,  n.  41. 

«'A.  383  ff.;  D.  145  if.;  S.  28  ^.— In  A.,  we  seem  to  have  tribute  held 
back,  an  overthrow  of  the  rebels,  and  a  governor  appointed.  This 
seems  to  be  only  a  case  of  formula.  D.  and  S.,  the  latter  to  be  read 
in  Cyprus  itself,  content  themselves  with  the  mere  report  of  the  royal 
power  as  cause  for  the  tribute.  A  few  lines  further  we  have  a  pas- 
sage, not  translated  by  Winckler,  of  some  interest.  The  context  can- 
not be  made  out  but  we  have  mention  of  a  man  named  ?-il-da-  ?-qu-ra-ai, 
A.  383  (V),  of  a  city  Ma(?)-?-na,  A.  385  (V),  and  of  another  person 
called  I-da-[ .  .  .  a]i,  A.  387  (II).  The  first  is  without  doubt  a 
name  ending  in  -agoras,  the  most  common  of  all  Cypriote  personal 
endings.  Compare,  in  Collitz,  op.  cit.,  Evagoras  (Ewvakoro), 
Aristagoras  (Arisitakorau),  Pnytagoras  (Punu  .  .  .),  Pasagoras  (Pasa- 
korani),  Cypragoras  (Kupurakorao),  Onasagoras  (Onasakorau).  It  is 
interesting  to  note  that  the  Assyrian  agrees  with  the  Cypriote  in 
changing  the  g  to  2l  k  or  q.  I  do  pot  know  what  to  make  of  the  first 
part.  Perhaps  the  first  sign  is  pa.  Parthagoras  is  then  possible. 
Of  course,  this  is  mere  conjecture.  The  city  Ma(?)-?-na  I  do  not 
know.  The  I-da-[  .  .  .  a]i  I  should  make  "  the  man  from  Idalion,  a 
city  which  occurs  on  both  Phoenician  and  Cypriote  inscriptions. — Any 
attempt  to  further  work  out  the  general  relations  of  the  Greeks  must 
be  very  hazardous.  The  reference  to  the  lamnai  in  C.  21  is  not  at  all 
clear.  We  there  learn  that  Sargon  dragged  them  from  the  sea  with  a 
net  (  ?)  like  fish  from  the  midst  of  the  sea  and  pacified  Que  and  Curri 
(Tyre).  If  the  translation  is  correct  here,  we  may  compare  the 
"  netting  "  saganeuein  of  Persian  times.  As  C.  is  a  display  inscription, 
it  is  not  very  probable  that  the  references  to  the  lamnai  are  to  be 
taken  in  connection  with  those  of  Tyre  and  Que.  For  the  same  reason, 
it  is  not  sure  that  these  passages  are  anything  more  than  an  idle  boast. 
Winckler,  Forsch.,  I.  360  ff.,  places  here  the  passages  from  Euseb. 
Chron.,  ed.  Schone,  I.  27,  35.  The  former  is  quoted  from  Alexander 
Polyhistor,  the  latter  from  Abydenus,  but  both  go  back  to  Berossus  and 
are  nearly  identical.  According  to  these,  the  lones  made  war  with  Sen- 
nacherib.   They  were  defeated,  in  a  naval  battle,  according  to  Abydenus. 


THE   NORTHWEST   FRONTIER  Id 

Sennacherib  then  erected  a  monument  and  founded  Tarsus.  This 
monument  is  clearly  the  one  at  Anchiale,  generally  attributed  to 
Sardanapallos  (Ashur  bani  pal),  of.  e.  g.,  Suidas,  s.  v.  Sardanapallus, 
while  Tarsus  existed  at  least  as  early  as  Shalmaneser  II.  From  the 
time  of  Sennacherib  on,  the  account  of  Berossus  is  fairly  full  and,  where 
it  can  be  tested,  as  trustworthy  as  can  be  expected.  There  is,  how- 
ever, no  reason  to  suppose  that  his  sources  were  less  full  for  Sargon 
or  Tiglath  Pileser  III  than  for  Sennacherib  or  Nebuchadnezzar.  The 
only  reason  why  we  do  not  have  this  section  is  that  the  Christian  ex- 
cerptors  did  not  think  it  of  value  as  illustrating  Biblical  history.  Have 
we,  then,  the  right  to  take  an  event  which  two  different  versions  agree 
in  giving  to  Sennacherib  and  assign  it  to  Sargon?  Certainly  not. 
Why  should  we  assign  a  naval  battle  to  Sargon?  There  is  no  proof 
that  he  had  a  navy  or  knew  its  value.  The  one  Assyrian  ruler  who  did 
understand  the  value  of  sea  power  was,  as  everybody  knows,  Senna- 
cherib, and  why  a  naval  battle,  ascribed  to  him  by  a  double  line  of 
tradition,  should  be  taken  away  from  him,  I  cannot  see.  While, 
however,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  Sennacherib  is  correctly  named 
as  the  victor,  there  is  a  question  in  my  mind  as  to  the  correctness  of 
the  name  given  to  the  vanquished.  Berossus,  the  Babylonian,  would  be 
unlikely  to  make  a  mistake  as  to  which  one  of  the  rulers  of  his  own 
country  won  a  great  battle  in  the  western  seas,  but  he  might  well  be- 
come confused  as  to  just  which  western  power  it  was.  In  his  own 
days,  the  Greeks  were  all-powerful,  and  he  may  have  been  led  to  give 
them  the  same  place  in  the  west  in  earlier  times.  But  the  good  rela- 
tions between  Greeks  and  Assyrians, — for  there  is  no  inscriptional  proof 
that  the  two  peoples  ever  came  into  actual  conflict, — hardly  allow  us 
to  place  a  war  with  them  here.  If  not  the  Greeks,  then  who  ?  The 
answer  may  be  found  in  the  list  of  thalassocracies,  or  periods  of  sea 
power,  held  by  the  various  peoples,  in  Euseb.  Chron.,  225.  Winckler, 
Forsch.,  II.  288  fF.,  assigns  the  Cypriote  period  to  about  700-677,  and  I 
think  he  is  correct.  He  also  rightly  assumes  that  this  rise  of  the 
Cypriote  power  was  due  to  the  union  with  Assyria.  If  so,  then  this 
means  that  the  Greeks  and  Assyrians  must  have  put  down  the  naval 
power  of  the  people  which  last  held  the  supremacy  at  sea.  But  these 
were  the  Phrygians !  Is  not  all  now  clear  ?  Sargon  warred  with 
Midas  by  land.  The  Cypriote  Greeks,  as  noted  above,  would  be  natural 
enemies  of  Midas  as  well  as  of  the  Phoenicians.  Union  with  Assyria 
was  therefore  natural.  Sargon  did  not  see  the  value  of  friendly  rela- 
tions with  Cyprus  any  more  than  he  did  that  of  Uperi  of  Tilmun  in  the 
Persian  Gulf.  His  successor  saw  the  need  of  Assyrian  control  of 
the  seas.  We  have  his  own  account  of  his  operations  on  the  Persian 
Gulf.       Midas    had    been    checked    by    Sargon    on    land.       Sennacherib 


102  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

ruined  his  power  at  sea,  aided,  of  course,  by  the  Cypriote  fleet.  The 
control  of  the  sea  would  then  naturally  pass  from  the  Phrygians  to 
the  Cypriotes.  This  working  out  seems  to  be  only  the  logical  result 
of  Winckler's  own  discussion  of  the  thalassocracies.  We  may  presume, 
therefore,  that  he  has  abandoned  his  earlier  views,  Forsch.,  I.  360  ff. 
Other  views  in  Schrader,  Sitzungsber,  of  Berlin  Academy,  1890,  340 
if. ;  Delitzsch,  Paradies,  248 ;  Maspero,  Empires,  260,  284. — Kition  is 
the  place  where  the  stele  was  found  and  is  therefore  the  most  im- 
portant place  in  the  island.  It  is  the  QartihadastI  of  Esarhaddon's 
Broken  Cyl.  V.  19  ff.  and  the  QRTHShT  of  the  Baal  Lebanon  inscrip- 
tion. For  this  Cypriote  Carthage,  cf.  Corpus  Ins.  Semit.,  I.  26,  98  ; 
Schrader,  op.  cit.,  339  ;  Jastrow,  Proc.  Amer.  Orient.  Soc,  1890,  LXX  ff. 
In  the  above  mentioned  inscription  of  Esarhaddon,  Idalion  occurs  as 
Edi'al.  The  forms  Pilagura  (Pythagoras)  and  Unasagusu  (Onisagoras) 
are  less  close  to  the  Cypriote  form  than  are  our  forms. 


CHAPTER   V 

THE  ARMENIAN  WARS 

As  we  have  already  seen,  one  of  the  antagonists  most  to 
be  feared  by  Assyria  was  Rusash  of  Haldia.  His  attempts 
to  regain  the  lost  Haldian  conquests  west  of  the  Euphrates 
have  been  noted  in  the  last  chapter.  In  this,  we  shall  see  the 
efforts  of  Sargon  to  bring  the  war  directly  home  to  him.^ 

When  Sargon  turned  his  attention  to  affairs  on  this  part 
of  his  frontier,  in  719,  he  found  a  good  base  for  attack  in 
the  large  and  important  tribe  of  the  Mannai  who  lived  to 
the  southeast  of  Haldia.-  As  next-door  neighbors  to  that 
power,  they  naturally  threw  in  their  lot  with  Assyria.  At 
this  time  their  chief  was  Iranzu,  who  seems  to  have  been 
devoted  to  his  Assyrian  ally.     To  the  south  of  the  Mannai 

^  For  discussion  of  Haldian  affairs  in  general,  see  chapter  II. 

^  The  Mannai  are  among  the  most  important  tribes  of  this  region. 
References  in  the  letters  and  other  documents  are  frequent.  Their 
location  is  somewhat  indefinite,  probably  because  they  covered  a  large 
area,  which  shifted  more  or  less  at  various  times.  In  general,  they 
were  allied  with  the  Assyrians.  A  large  part,  as  their  names  would 
seem  to  show,  were  Iranian,  yet  other  parts  seem  to  be  akin  to  the 
Haldians.  They  seem  later  to  have  been  confused  with  the  Madai. 
Note  that  our  Daiukku  of  Mannai  founds  the  Median  empire  according 
to  Herodotus.  Hommel,  Gesch.,  598,  713,  n.  3,  and  Schrader, 
Sitzungsher.,  of  Berlin  Academy,  1890,  331,  place  them  in  the  region 
between  the  Araxes  and  Lake  Urmia.  This  may  be  true  so  far  as  it 
goes,  but  they  certainly  came  further  south.  The  same  may  be  said 
of  their  location  to  the  northwest  of  the  lake  by  Streck,  Zeitsch.  f. 
Assyr.,  1899,  143,  and  Sayce,  Jour.  Roy.  Asiat.  Soc,  1882,  497. 
Winckler,  Gesch.,  200,  places  them  to  the  west,  Billerbeck,  Beitr.  z. 
Assyr.,  III.  139,  to  the  southwest,  and  Belck,  Verhandl.  Berl.  Anthrop. 
Gesellsch.,  1894,  479.  to  the  southwest  and  southeast.  This  last  is  seem- 
ingly correct. 

103 


I04  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

lay  Zikirtu,^  whose  chief,  Mittatti,  just  as  naturally  allied 
himself  with  Rusash  against  the  Mannai.  While  Sargon,  or 
at  least  his  armies,  were  engaged  elsewhere,  Mittatti  per- 
suaded two  of  the  Mannai  towns,  Shuandahuh  and  Dur- 
dukka,*  to  revolt  against  Iranzu,  and  sent  a  garrison  to  hold 
them.    Iranzu  appealed  to  Sargon,  and  Sargon  sent  an  army. 

50  well  garrisoned  were  they  that  a  regular  siege  with  siege 
engines  was  needed  to  capture  them.  When  taken,  they  were 
burned  and  their  inhabitants  deported.*^  At  about  the  same 
time,  the  three  neighboring  towns  of  Sukkia,  Bala,  and 
Abitekna  were  captured  and  the  people  carried  off  to 
Syria.® 

Again,  in  717,  there  were  disturbances  in  this  region,  as 
the  Papa  and  Lallukna^  were  ravaging  the  friendly  land  of 
Kakme.^    They  were  conquered  and  deported  to  Damascus. 

'  The  identification  of  Zikirtu  with  the  Persian  clan  of  the  Sagartioi, 
Herod.  I.  125,  is  generally  accepted.  It  was  near  to  Mannai  on  the 
south,  yet  was  passed  by  the  Assyrians  in  going  to  Mugagir.  I  should 
therefore  place  it  southeast  of  Mugagir,  about  at  Pasava.  Billerbeck's 
map  places  its  capital,  Parda,  at  Marand,  northeast  of  Lake  Urmia. 

*  These  places  must  be  north  of  Zikirtu,  about  east  of  the  Kelishin  Pass. 
The  Durdukka  of  A.  is  the  Zurzukka  of  D..  With  the  latter,  Winckler, 
Sargon,  XX,  n.  i,  compares  Zurzua  of  Ptol.  V.  12.  7.  He  might  also 
have  compared  the  Zaruana  of  the  same  section.  But  both  are  too  far 
north  to  make  an  identification  probable. 

'  A.  32  ff. ;  D.  48. 

'A.  40  ff.;  D.  57;  XIV.  30;  C.  28.  The  passages  in  D.  and  C.  at 
first  seem  to  indicate  that  they,  with  the  Papa  and  Lallukna,  annoyed 
Kakme  and  were  therefore  carried  off  to  Damascus.  This  is  the 
view  of  Streck,  op.  cit.,  132.  But  this  is  merdy  the  usual  merging  due 
to  geographical  contiguity.      The  real  order  is  given  in  A. 

^  The  form  Pappa  seems  due  to  confusion  with  Pappa-Paphos  of 
Cyprus.  The  normal  form  is  therefore  not  Pappa,  as  Streck,  op.  cit., 
133,  but  Papa. 

*  Streck,  op.  cit.,  132,  translates  the  very  doubtful  passage  C.  28  =  A. 

51  "  welche  gegen  dasselbe  ganz  offentlich  Plane  geschmiedet  hatten." 
This  would  make  the  deportation  the  result  of  depredations  committed 
by  the  highland   tribes   on   the   lowlanders,   the   pro-Assyrian   people   of 


THE   ARMENIAN    WARS  IO5 

About  this  time  the  Mannai  themselves  went  over  to 
Haldia.  Iranzu,  the  friend  of  Assyria,  died,  or  to  use  the 
more  picturesque  Assyrian  expression,  "  his  fate  came  upon 
him."  His  son  and  successor,  Aza,®  was  also  a  "lover  of 
the  yoke  of  Ashur."  The  "  yoke  of  Ashur,"  however,  was 
anything  but  light,  and  Rusash,  who  had  already  made 
trouble  for  Assyria,^**  persuaded  the  commons  to  strike  for 
liberty.  Perhaps  we  may  see  in  it  a  revolt  of  the  Aryans 
against  the  older  race  for  the  new  ruler.  Bagdatti^^  of 
Uishdish^^  bears  an  Iranian  name,  and  was  supported  by 

Kakme,  But,  on  this  assumption,  how  can  we  explain  N.  9,  "  who 
shook  the  breast  of  Kakme,  men  who  were  hostile  and  wicked  "  ?  This 
inscription  dates  to  within  a  year  of  the  actual  events  and  is  there- 
fore worthy  of  a  certain  belief,  even  if  only  a  display  inscription.  In 
this  latter  passage,  Streck  takes  mutaqin  with  the  clause  just  noted. 
But  this  is  entirely  contrary  to  the  usage  of  these  display  inscriptions 
where  the  participle  precedes  the  noun  it  governs.  Does  A.  51  point 
to  a  treacherous  understanding  between  the  Papa  and  Lallukna  and 
certain  officials  of  the  palace? 

'  Johns,  Doomsday  Book,  46,  notes  an  Azi  baal  and  an  Azi  ilu  and 
therefore  makes  Aza  a  Semite.  But  the  large  number  of  Iranian 
names  beginning  with  Aza  fully  justifies  Justi,  Namenhuch,  s.  v.,  in 
placing  Aza  among  them. 

"In  719  according  to  Prism  B.       Cf.  note  below  on  chronology. 

"  The  first  part  of  the  name  Bagdatti  is  clearly  Baga,  "  god,"  the 
latter  comes  from  the  word  "  to  give."  We  have  therefore  an  exact 
parallel  in  Iranian  to  the  Greek  Theodotus,  cf.  Mithridates.  Accord- 
ingly, we  cannot  accept  the  theory  of  Jensen,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  1893, 
378,  that  Datti  is  a  god,  nor  that  of  Johns,  Doomsday  Book,  40,  who 
compares  a  Bagdadi  and  sees  in  the  second  part  the  well-known  Semitic 
love  deity. 

"D.  37,  49  reads  (mat)U-ish-di-ish-ai.  Winckler  takes  the  first  ish 
as  mil.  But  ish  is  the  common  value  of  this  sign  in  Assyrian  and 
the  only  value  in  Haldian.  We  should  therefore  read  Uishdish.  In 
XIV.  47  the  first  ish  is  merely  dropped  out,  while  in  A.  no,  U-e-di-ish, 
the  e  is  an  easy  error  for  ish,  as  Winckler  sees.  Streck,  op.  cit.,  140, 
146,  compares  the  Ishdish  of  Tiglath  Pileser  I,  Prism  II.  68,  78,  read 
Mildish  by  Budge  and  King.  He  places  it,  op.  cit.,  146,  southwest  of 
the  Mannai  and  south  of  Lake  Van  on  the  very  doubtful  assumption  that 


I06  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

Mitatti  of  Zikirtu.  Aza  was  deposed  and  his  dead  body  ex- 
posed on  Mount  Uaush.  His  reign,  too,  was  short,  for  the 
Assyrians  took  him  alive,  flayed  him,  and  exposed  his 
bleeding  form  on  this  same  Mount  Uaush.^^ 

He  was  succeeded  by  Ullusunu,  the  brother  of  Aza,^*  who 
had  thus  a  legitimate  claim  to  the  throne.  Whether  placed 
on  the  throne  by  the  Assyrians  or  not,^^  he  soon  saw  that 
Rusash  was  the  nearer  and  more  dangerous  foe.  He  there- 
fore made  his  peace  with  Haldia  and  handed  over,  probably 
not  without  compulsion,  twenty-two  towns  as  proof  of  his 
good  faith.  As  a  result  of  his  defection  from  Assyria, 
Ashur  liu^^  of  Karalla,^'  and  Itti  of  AUabria^^  followed  his 
example. 

the  Aruma  of  Uishdish  is  the  Arua  of  Kirhu.  We  should  rather  place 
it  among  the  Mannai  and  near  Zikirtu,  that  is  somewhere  east  of 
Kelishin  Pass  and  south  of  Lake  Urmia.  Cf.  also  the  Ashdiash  of 
Ashur  bani  pal,  Cyl.  B.,  III.  34. 

"  D.  37  adds  the  (amel)  (mat)  Misiandai  to  Bagdatti  and  Mitatti  as 
instigators  of  the  revolt.  Who  he  was,  we  do  not  know.  We  should 
probably  see  in  the  second  part  Andia,  cf.  below,  Hommel,  Gesch.,  713 
n.  Is  Misi  the  name  of  the  man  ?  The  scribe  has  clearly  made  an 
error  here.  The  "  governors  "  of  A.  may  refer  to  these  men  or  to  the 
Mannai  chieftains.  The  former  is  the  more  probable. — Maspero, 
Empires,  240,  greatly  exaggerates  the  importance  of  Mitatti  in  this 
revolt. 

"  Ullusunu  is  generally  taken  to  be  the  son  of  Iranzu  and  brother  of 
Aza,  for  it  is  to  the  latter  that  it  seems  we  should  refer  the  ahishu, 
"his  brother,"  of  A.  57.  Streck,  op.  cit.,  135  refers  this  to  Bagdatti 
and  makes  him  the  brother  of  Ullusunu  and  son  of  Aza,  but  this  is  very 
unlikely.  No  stress  can  be  laid  on  D.  39,  "  on  the  throne  of  his 
father,"  for  this  is  merely  a  formal  statement.  XIV.  53,  "  Ullusunu 
on  the  throne  of  Aza  established  himself,"  shows  no  recognition  of 
Bagdatti  as  regular  ruler. 

"Tiele,  Gesch.,  262  n.  i,  does  not  think  Sargon  had  anything  to  do 
with  the  accession  of  Ullusunu.  In  XIV.  53,  usheshibu  may  be  a 
first  as  well  a  third  person. 

"  On  the  basis  of  his  Assyrian  name,  "  Ashur  is  mighty,"  Winckler, 
Gesch.,   241    n.,   suggests   that   he   may   have   been    a    revolted   Assyrian 


THE   ARMENIAN    WARS  IO7 

All  these  events  seem  to  have  taken  place  in  717,  if  not 
earlier.^®  Now,  in  716,  a  new  expedition  was  sent  out,  seem- 
ingly under  the  Nabuhashadua,  whose  report  on  the  affairs 
of  Ashur  liu  and  Ullusunu  has  come  down  to  us.-^  The 
expedition  succeeded.  Ullusunu  took  to  the  hills  on  their 
approach,  but  when  he  saw  the  burning  and  plundering  of 

governor  who  carved  out  a  kingdom  for  himself  in  the  troublous  times 
before  the  accession  of  Sargon.  But  the  fact  that  his  brother  was 
named  Amitashshi  seems  to  prove  that  the  Assyrian  name  was  given 
or  assumed  only  to  indicate  Assyrian  leanings. 

"  Karalla  is  placed  to  the  east  of  Lake  Urmia,  Maspero,  op.  cit., 
141  map,  and  to  the  northeast  by  Billerbeck,  map.  Streck,  op.  cit., 
163  if.,  places  it  near  the  Mannai,  between  them  and  Kirruri,  the  latter 
of  which  he  places,  op.  cit.,  169,  to  the  west  and  southwest  of  Lake 
Urmia.  This  is  more  probable.  Karalla  appears  only  in  the  time  of 
Sargon.  As  it  was  annexed  to  the  empire,  while  Allabria  was  not, 
it  was  probably  nearer  to  Assyria. 

"  Allabria  or  Allabra  first  occurs  in  the  Annals  of  Ashur  nagir  pal, 
in.  109.  Here  it  is  connected  with  Amedi  and  Kashiari.  Streck  is 
therefore  right  in  placing  it  in  Tur  'Abdin,  in  the  Koros  Mts.,  or  in 
those  to  the  east  along  the  Tigris,  op.  cit.,  87.  But  while  this  location 
is  no  doubt  correct  for  that  early  time,  it  will  not  do  for  the  days  of 
Sargon.  Maspero,  op.  cit.,  141,  193,  maps,  puts  it  to  the  east  of  Karalla, 
which  itself  is  placed  to  the  east  of  Lake  Urmia.  Winckler,  on  his 
map,  also  places  it  to  the  east.  I  would  rather  place  it  to  the  south- 
west of  the  lake  and  beyond  Karalla. 

"  Cf.  the  chronological  note  below. 

^  Sm.  935   unpublished.      Reference  in  Bezold,   Catalogue. 

^^  Izirtu  is  probably  the  Zirta  of  Obelisk,  166,  of  Shalmaneser  IL 
It  is  already  the  capital  of  the  Mannai.  Streck,  op.  cit.,  138  f., 
compares  the  first  part  of  the  Haldian  Sisirihadiris  of  Sayce  XXXIII. 
39.  Billerbeck,  map  in  Ency.  Bibl.,  places  Izirtu  at  the  Arza  of 
Kiepert's  map,  half  way  between  Van  and  Urmia  and  on  the  direct  road 
between  the  two  places.  The  situation  is  probable,  but  we  can  place 
no  confidence  in  the  name,  for  it  appears  as  Arza  and  Atis  on  Kiepert's 
map,  while  on  that  of  Lynch  it  is  Argis.  The  whole  topographical  study 
is  still  very  difficult.  The  general  outlines  of  the  natural  topography 
is  fairly  well  known,  but  the  nomenclature  is  in  the  greatest  confusion. 
Instead  of  the  present  crude  transliterations  of  names,  we  need  to  have 
these    presented    both    in    the    Armenian    and    Turkish    characters    with 


I08  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

his  capital,  Izirtu,^^  as  well  as  some  of  his  other  cities,"  he 
came  out  and  sued  for  peace.  This  was  granted  with 
alacrity,  showing  either  that  his  defection  was  considered 
due  to  force  or  that  the  friendship  of  the  Mannai  was  too 
important  for  Sargon  to  risk  it  by  severe  measures. 

The  two  chieftains  who  had  followed  his  example  did  not 
come  off  so  easily,  for  an  example  was  needed,  and  they 
were  not  important  enough  to  make  severe  treatment  dan- 
gerous. Ashur  liu  was  flayed  alive  and  his  men  deported 
to  Hamath,  where  they  were  joined  by  Itti  and  his  family. 
Karalla  was  made  a  province,  while  Allabria  was  granted  to 
a  certain  Adar  aplu  iddin,  whose  name  indicates  his  As- 
syrian leanings.^^ 

which  they  are  written  and  in  a  transcription  which  will  represent  the 
actual  pronunciation.  Even  with  this,  work  will  be  difficult.  The 
place  must  first  be  located  approximately  on  purely  topographical 
grounds.  Similarity  of  names  is  then  a  welcome  rather  than  neces- 
sary confirmation.  Shifting  of  population  has  caused  a  large  propor- 
tion of  names  to  be  lost  or  changed  in  location,  while  shifting  in 
pronunciation,  which  has  taken  place  to  a  marked  degree  in  Armenian, 
makes  resemblances  deceptive  and  hides  real  traces.  Much  work  is 
still  needed  here,  especially  for  the  rural  dialects. 

^  These  were  Zibia  or  Izibia,  doubtfully  identified  by  Streck,  op.  cit., 
139  n.  I,  with  the  Uzbia  of  the  Cyl.  B.  III.  47  of  Ashur  bani  pal,  men- 
tioned in  connection  with  Izirtu,  a  very  probable  conjecture.  Armaid, 
Armeid,  or  Armeidda,  is  identified  by  Streck,  op.  cit.,  139,  with  the 
Araid  of  A.  119  on  the  border  of  the  sea,  Lake  Van,  according  to 
Streck,  but  more  probably  Urmia.  Urmaid  is  also  mentioned  on  Prism 
B  with  Kishesim  under  year  V  (717).  Here  also  should  perhaps  be 
placed  the  Is-ha-?-gur,  a  fortress  of  the  Mannai,  whose  capture  is 
represented  in  Sculp.  XIV.  2. 

^  Our  main  authority  for  these  events  is  A.  52-64.  It  is  clear  that 
more  than  one  year  is  represented  here.  The  order  is  correct, 
although  the  definite  chronology  is  not.  The  events  are  badly  dis- 
torted in  D.,  not  only  by  the  usual  dividing  into  geographical  sections, 
but  also  by  ascriptions  to  the  various  actors  and  confusion  with  those 
of  the  following  year.  The  pertinent  sections  are  D.  36-42  50-51 
for  Ullusunu,  49  for  Bagdatti,  55-66  for  Ashur  liu  and  Itti.      K.   1660, 


THE   ARMENIAN    WARS  IO9 

The  next  year,  715,  the  results  were  more  or  less  unim- 
portant. One  expedition  was  directed  against  a  certain 
Daiukku,  a  Mannai  governor,  who  had  given  his  son  to 
Rusash  as  a  hostage.  Rusash,  however,  gave  no  help,  and 
Daiukku  was  deported  to  Hamath.  The  name  of  the  man 
is  more  interesting  than  his  personality.  Daiukku  is  nothing 
but  Deiokes,  and  it  is  quite  possible  that  the  proto- 
type of  the  Median  prince  who  founded,  according  to 
Herodotus,  the  Median  kingdom  at  this  very  time,  is  to  be 
seen  in  this  underling.  We  should  also  note  that  the  name 
is  Iranian.  Do  we  see  here,  as  in  the  case  of  Bagdatti, 
another  reaction  of  the  Iranian  element  in  the  Mannai 
against  the  non-Iranian  ?  ^* 

published  by  Winckler,  Sammlung,  II.  4,  is  a  Babylonian  fragment, 
probably  of  a  display  inscription.  It  mentions  Ashur  liu  and  Itti  as 
well  as  Kammanu  and  Tarhulara  of  Marqasha  (Marqasi).  We  there- 
fore have  no  chronology  here ;  against  Bezold,  Catalogue,  who  ascribes  it 
to  year  VI.  The  letter  S.  935  has  already  been  referred  to.  Prism  B., 
which  mentions  Ashur  liu,  Ullusunu  and  Itti  and  describes  the  booty 
as  horses,  herds,  flocks,  and  cloth  stuffs,  is  important  for  the  chronology 
and  will  be  discussed  below. 

^From  the  time  of  F.  Lenormant,  Lettres  Assyrologiques,  I.  55,  the 
verbal  identity  of  this  Daiukku,  as  well  as  of  the  Bit  Daiukku  of  A. 
140,  with  the  Deoikes  of  Herod.  I.  16,  etc.,  has  not  been  questioned. 
The  date,  say  708,  of  Herodotus  agrees  so  closely  with  our  data  that 
I  can  hardly  believe  that  there  is  no  connection.  If  already  there  were 
Median  tales  afloat  in  regard  to  a  certain  Deiokes,  founder  of  the 
Median  empire,  it  would  be  perfectly  natural  for  some  one  who  was 
acquainted  with  cuneiform  to  localize  him  by  identifying  him  with 
the  Daiukku  of  our  lists.  A  somewhat  similar  case  is  the  placing  of 
Abraham  in  the  days  of  Hammurabi.  If  so,  then  the  chronology  of 
the  kings  is  not  that  of  Herodotus,  but  of  his  oriental  sources.  It 
is  well  known  that  the  chronology  of  Ctesias  is  a  curious  amplification 
of  that  of  Herodotus,  but  it  is  also  clear  that  he  had  cuneiform  sources 
for  his  names.  Is  it  possible  that  his  chronology  is  based  on  a 
native  source  directly  rather  than  on  Herodotus? 

Perhaps  we  may  compare  the  (amel)  Daiku  of  K.  2852,  Winckler, 
Forsch.,  II.  28  if.  Sayce  makes  the  Mandaukas  of  Ctesias,  Fr.  47  = 
Man ,+  Deiokes,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  but  the  better  reading  is  Madaukes. 


no  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

Sargon  next  turned  his  attention  to  the  twenty-two  towns 
recently  "  given  "  to  Rusash  and  won  them  back.  The  fact 
that  they  were  restored  to  Ullusunu  is  another  proof  that  his 
defection  was  unwilHng.  Even  when  Sargon  erected  a  stele 
in  Izirtu,  his  capital,  he  remained  true  to  Assyria. ^^ 

Another  interesting  event  was  the  receiving  of  tribute  from 
the  ianmi-^  of  Nairi  at  his  capital  of  Hubushkia.^'  Nairi, 
which  here  occurs  for  the  last  time,  a  comparatively  re- 
stricted district,  was  once  applied  to  all  the  tribes  of  the 
northern  frontier.^*  Tribute  was  also  received  from  eight 
towns  of  the  land  of  Tuaiadi,  which  was  ruled  by  Telusina 
the  Andian,  and  over  four  thousand  men  were  deported 
from  it.2» 

Tide,  art.  Persia,  Ency.  Bibl.,  doubts  the  identity  of  this  Hamath  with 
the  Syrian  city  of  that  name.  The  numerous  settlements  in  Syria, 
however,  make  such  an  identity  practically  certain. 

^A.  77,  by  the  usual  anticipation,  places  the  capture  of  these  forts 
in  year  VII,  and  Winckler,  Sargon,  XXIV ;  Tiele,  Gesch.,  263  ;  Maspero, 
Empires  242,  place  it  accordingly  in  715.  It  is  rather  to  be  placed  in 
the  year  or  years  preceding,  in  accordance  with  the  testimony  of  D. 
39,  44,  52,  where  a  more  natural  order  is  given.  For  the  actual  date, 
see  below. 

^  The  Assyrian  scribes  both  here  and  in  the  case  of  the  iansti  of 
Namri,  Shalmaneser  II,  Obelisk,  112,  took  it  as  a  proper  name.  The 
Cossaean  list  however,  quoted  as  82-9-18, — there  is  no  such  number 
in  the  Catalogue, — Delitzsch,  Koss'der,  1884,  29  if.,  shows  it  to  be  a 
title  by  giving  it  as  the  equivalent  of  sharru,  "  king." 

^^  Sachau,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  1897,  53;  Schrader,  Keilinschr.  und 
Geschichtsforschung,  164,  places  it  too  far  to  the  northwest;  Belck, 
Verh.  Berl.  Anthrop.  GeselL,  1894,  483,  and  later  writers  place  it  more 
to  the  south.  Sayce,  Jour.  Roy.  Asiat.  Soc,  1882,  674,  makes  the  name 
Vannic.  Sachau,  /,  c,  identifies  it  with  the  classical  Moxoene,  the 
Armenian  Mokkh. 

^  A.  75  ff. ;  D.  52  ff. — The  reference  to  nine  towns  of  five  regions 
belonging  to  Ursa  of  Urartu,  A.  79,  and  the  annexation  of  these  towns, 
is  not  clear. 

^  A.  81  ff.;  D.  45  /. — According  to  Delattre,  Medes,  82  f.,  Andia  is 
east    of    the    Matai,    between    the    mountains    of    Matai,    Urmia    and 


THE   ARMENIAN    WARS  I  I  I 

The  following  year  matters  became  more  serious.  To 
follow  the  Assyrian  account  we  should  assume  that  a  direct 
attack  was  made  on  Rusash,  that  a  great  defeat  was  inflicted 
and  that  this  defeat  was  so  crushing  that  "  when  Ursa  of 
Urartu  heard  of  the  destruction  of  Mugagir,  the  capture  of 
his  god,  Haldia,  with  his  own  hand,  with  the  iron  dagger  of 
his  girdle,  his  life  he  ended."  ^°  In  several  ways,  neverthe- 
less, the  story  does  not  ring  true,  and  even  without  docu- 
ments from  the  Haldian  side,  its  truth  might  be  doubted. 
With  the  account  of  Rusash  himself  we  can  understand  the 
general  course  of  events.^^ 

The  Mannai  lay  between  Haldia  and  Mugagir.^^^  Nat- 
urally, the  two  were  united  against  them.  As  the  more 
powerful,  Rusash  controlled  Mugagir.  As  a  perpetual  re- 
minder of  this  control,  Rusash  followed  Assyrian  precedents 
and  erected  a  statue  of  his  national  god  Haldia^^  in  Mugagir, 

Parachoatras  (Elburz).  Billerbeck,  Suleimania,  156,  places  them  north 
of  L.  Urmia  in  the  Anzal  region.  We  may  see  another  reference  to 
Andia  in  the  Kalhu  inscription,  9,  of  Adad  nirari.  * 

^°D.   76   /. 

^^  The  Topsana  stele.      Cf.  chap.  I.  n,  63. 

^^  The  place  is  called  Mugagir  in  the  Assyrian,  but  Ardine  in  the 
Haldian  Topsana  stele.  The  latter  is  clearly  related  to  the  Haldian 
sun  god  Ardinish,  although  curiously  enough  the  gods  of  the  city  are 
Haldia  and  Bagabartu.  The  site  has  been  fixed  by  the  discovery  of 
this  stele  as  at  a  ruin  between  Sidikin  and  the  Kelishin  Pass,  Belck, 
Zeitschr.  f.  Ethn.,  1899,  103. 

^  That  the  Haldia  of  the  Assyrian  inscriptions  was  the  chief  god 
Haldish  of  the  Haldians  was  already  seen  by  Oppert,  Pastes,  8  n.  3. 
The  use  of  Haldi  as  a  god's  name  is  common  in  the  later  days  of 
Assyria,  cf.  Johns,  Deeds,  index.  The  contract  K.  358  =:  J.  416  is 
especially  interesting,  for  we  have  here  a  Rusa',  a  Haldi  ibni,  and  a 
Haldi  ugur,  and  this  in  the  year  710.  Cf.  also  the  Elamite  deity,  as 
e.  g.,  in  Humma  haldash.  Perhaps  Oppert,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  1887, 
106,  is  right  in  comparing  the  Handita  (Haldita),  the  father  of 
Arahu,  the  Armenian,  Behistun  Ins.,  HI.  78. 


112  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

while  the  native, — and  probably  Iranian, — Bagabartu,^*  was 
degraded  to  the  station  of  a  consort. 

Sargon  took  the  field,  probably  in  person,  to  aid  the 
Mannai  against  this  combination.  After  a  preliminary  ex- 
pedition against  Elli  and  Zikirtu,  he  found  himself  within 
the  great  mountain  barrier  which  now  forms  the  boundary 
between  Persia  and  Turkey,^^  and  within  striking  distance 
of  Mugagir.  Rusash  hurried  south,  breaking  through  the 
Mannai,  to  come  to  the  help  of  his  ally.  As  Sargon  ad- 
vanced, Rusash  took  up  his  position  on  Mount  Uaush.  A 
battle  was  fought  and  Sargon  was  victorious,  the  body 
guard,  two  hundred  and  forty  Haldians  of  the  blood  royal, 
being  completely  destroyed.^®     Then,  after  a  stop  at  Hu- 

'*  Rost,  Mittheil,  Vorderasiat.  Gesellsch.,  1897,  2,  86  reads  the  name  of 
Bagabartu  as  Bagamashtu,  i.  e.,  Baga,  "  god,"  plus  Mazda.  Even  if 
sht  can  represent  zd,  op.  cit.,  11 1  f.,  it  is  still  unlikely  that  the  third 
sign  should  be  read  mash  instead  of  bar.  The  former  is  used  in 
Assyrian  and,  according  to  Jensen,  Wiener  Zeitschr.  f.  Kunde  Morgenl., 
VI.  61,  is  the  Elamitish  value  also.  But  bar  is  the  common  value  in 
Assyrian  and  the  only  one  in  Haldian.  As  Assyrian  was  used  in 
Mugagir,  as  the  seal  of  Urzana  and  his  letters  show,  and  as  Haldian 
also  was  probably  known,  since  we  have  the  Topsana  stele  close  to 
Mugagir  and  a  Haldian  hegemony  in  that  region,  we  must  prefer  the 
value  bar.  For  bartu,  cf.  Bardanes  or  Bardiya.  Baga  is  generally 
taken  to  mean  god  and  to  indicate  that  this  is  an  Iranian  deity.  On 
the  other  hand,  K.  1067  =:H.  139,  with  its  mention  of  Teshv^  and  the 
name  Urzana  itself,  seems  to  point  to  Haldian.  It  is  probable  that 
both  in  Mannai  and  in  Mugagir,  Iranian  and  Haldian  elements  were 
pretty  much  intermingled  by  this  time.  Prism  B.  calls  Bagabartu  the 
ishtar  or  consort  of  Haldia.  For  a  weaker  god  thus  becoming  the 
consort  of  a  stronger,  cf.  M.  Jastrow,  Religion  of  Assyria  and  Babylonia, 
1898,  49. 

^  The  topography  as  well  as  the  strategy  of  this  campaign  has  been 
most  admirably  worked  out  as  a  result  of  minute  personal  knowledge 
gained  on  the  spot,  by  W.  Belck,  Zeitschr.  f.  Ethn.,  1899,  99  fF.  In 
general,  I  have  followed  his  reconstructions. 

^A.  107  if. — Rusash  is  said  to  have  mounted  a  mare  and  fled  to 
Haldia.      For  the  flight  on  mare's  back  and  its  disgrace,  cf.  the  mare 


THE   ARMENIAN    WARS  II3 

bushkia  to  receive  again  the  tribute  of  the  iansu  of  Nairi, 
he  suddenly  turned  to  the  west  and  made  a  dash  upon 
Mugagir.  The  Httle  mountain  stronghold,  confident  in  the 
inaccessibility  of  the  direct  road  from  Arbela,  was  taken  in 
the  rear  by  this  dash  through  the  Kelishin  Pass,^^  and  cap- 
tured.   Urzana,^^  its  king,  fled  to  Rusash  and  left  his  city 

episode  of  Sardurish  after  the  battle  with  Tiglath  Pileser  III,  Nimnid 
II,  35.  Land  for  five  kasbu  from  Mt.  Uaush  to  Mt.  Ziharadussu  and 
Mt.  Uishdish  was  taken  and  given  to  Ullusunu.  The  Annals  has  next 
a  mutilated  passage  naming  places  captured.  They  are  probably  to 
be  referred  to  the  Mannai,  though  Streck,  op.  cit.,  wavers  between  these 
and  Urartu.  They  are  Ushqaia  at  the  entrance  of  the  land  of  Zaran-  ? ; 
?-ibr(?)ina;  Mallau ;  Durigliraksatu(  ?)  with  140  of  its  towns;  the 
city  of  Ashtania  which  is  in  Bit  Sangibuti,  this  last  being  clearly  out 
of  place.  Billerbeck,  Suleimania,  80  n.  2 ;  the  cities  of  Tarui  and 
Tarmukisa  in  the  land  of  Dala-  ? ;  Ulhu  which  lay  at  the  foot  of  Mt. 
Kishpal ;  X,+  2i  strongholds  and  140  towns  of  Mt.  Arzabria,  this 
also  in  K.  5464;  X  strongholds,  30  towns  in  the  land  of  Armadalli(?)  ; 
some  regions  near  Mt.  Ubianda ;  the  city  of  Arbu  where  Rusash  did 
something;  the  city  ?-tar(?)  sha  and  two  others;  some  strongholds 
of  the  land  of  Araid,  perhaps  Armaid,  Streck,  op.  cit.,  139,  which  was 
on  the  sea  shore,  naturally  of  Urmia,  though  Streck,  /.  c,  takes  it  to 
be  Van ;  the  cities  of  Ar-  ?-u  and  Kadulania  on  Mt.  Argi-  ?  and  in 
the  regions  of  Mt.  Arzunia(?);  and  5  strongholds  and  30  lowns  of 
Mt.  Uaiaush,  perhaps  to  be  connected  with  Mt.  Uaush. — In  the  text, 
I  have  followed  Belck's  reconstruction  of  the  campaign.  But  S.  I. 
46  ff.  places  the  great  battle  after  the  capture  of  Mugagir.  Although 
the  stele  is  a  display  inscription,  it  belongs  to  the  better  class  and 
may  be  correct  here.  A  defeat  by  Rusash  after  the  capture  of  Mugagir 
would  certainly  account  for  the  Assyrian  evacuation  and  retreat  as 
well  as  for  the  return  of  Rusash.  Still,  this  may  be  a  mere  error  and 
the  winter  a  sufficient  cause  for  retreat. 

"  The  mountains  are  Seak,  Ardi-  ?-shi,  Ulaiau,  Alluria.  Maspero, 
Empires,  248,  reads  the  second  as  Ardinish,  probably  correctly,  com- 
paring it  with  the  Haldian  sun  god.  It  is  probably  to  be  connected 
with  the  native  name  of  Mugagir,  Ardine. 

^  Urzana  is  called  Urz  an  ashe  and  Urzanani  on  the  Topsana  stele. 

Streck,  op.  cit.,  63  n.   i,  makes  the  name  Urza  plus  na.      His  seal  is 

often  pictured,  e.  g.,  Maspero,  Empires,  249.      He  is  the  author  of  the 

letter  Rm.  2,  2  =  H.  409    (cf.  last  chapter)    and  of   S.    1056  =  H.   768, 

8 


I  14  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

to  be  plundered.  The  relief  which  Sargon  erected  to  com- 
memorate the  plunder  of  the  great  temple  and  the  carrying 
of  the  gods,  Haldia  and  Bagabartu,  into  captivity,  has  been 
preserved  and  merits  study.  On  it  we  have  the  temple 
with  its  curiously  Greek  pediment,  its  banded  columns,  its 
votive  shields  hung  up  in  front,  its  great  bull-footed  lavers 
in  the  forecourt,  and  its  statue  of  a  she  wolf  suckling  her 
young  in  front.  Here,  too,  we  have  the  Assyrian  soldiers 
climbing  to  the  top  or  running  along  its  sloping  roof,  while 
on  a  nearby  tower  an  Assyrian  officer  sits  on  a  camp-stool 
and  the  scribes  stand  before  him  to  reckon  up  the  spoil. 
And,  indeed,  they  might  reckon  it  in  good  earnest,  for,  if  we 
could  believe  the  Assyrian  scribes  themselves,  the  spoil  from 
this  little  mountain  village  was  greater  than  that  taken  from 
Carchemish,  the  great  merchant  city  of  the  West !  ^® 

Thus  far  we  have  followed  the  Assyrian  account,  and  in 
general  it  has  seemed  trustworthy  enough.  Here  it  sud- 
denly breaks  off,  and  we  have  no  further  military  informa- 
tion. Instead,  we  are  told  of  the  suicide  of  Rusash.  It 
would  be  difficult  to  give  a  rational  reason  for  this  suicide, 
for  a  single  defeat  in  the  enemy's  country  and  the  capture  of 
a  god  in  a  city  a  hundred  miles  away  from  his  own  capital 
is  hardly  enough.  Fortunately,  we  have  his  own  account  to 
guide  us  from  this  point. 

about  the  transport  of  horses  and  sheep.  S.  358  mentions  his  brother. 
He  is  mentioned  in  connection  with  a  military  report  in  81-7-27,  46, 
while  Rm.  554  not  only  refers  to  Urzana,  but  also  to  Uasi  and  to 
Hubushkia,  cf.  Bezold,  Catalogue.  Rost,  op.  cit.,  113,  compares  the 
Uarzan  of  the  Median  list. 

^®  The  bas  relief  is  Botta  II.  141,  often  published,  e.  g.,  Maspero, 
Empires,  59. — The  booty  included  mules,  oxen(?),  sheep,,  gold,  silver, 
bronze,  jewels,  masses  of  colored  stuffs  and  clothing.  We  are  told 
that  there  was  taken  34  talents  of  gold,  160  of  silver.  Compare  this 
with  the  modest  1 1  of  gold  from  Carchemish. — Here  we  may  mention 
Uabti,  a  city  of  Mugagir,  mentioned  on  the  Urzana  seal. 


THE   ARMENIAN    WARS  115 

The  greater  part  of  the  year  had  evidently  been  taken  up 
with  these  operations.  Winter  was  now  coming  on.  With 
the  scarcity  of  forage  on  these  mountain  heights,  to  winter 
in  Mugagir  was  impossible.  Yet  the  direct  road  home 
through  Arbela  was  impractical  for  an  army,  even  if  there 
was  no  enemy  to  harass  his  retreat.  The  only  thing  to  do 
was  to  turn  back  and  follow  his  old  track.  Rusash  returned, 
re-established  Urzana,  and  rebuilt  the  temple.  The  next 
year  Rusash  took  the  offensive  and  "  went  to  battle  to  the 
Assyrian  mountains,''  "^^  probably  by  the  Arbela  road.  As 
no  victories  are  claimed  it  may  be  presumed  that  none  were 
gained.  Rusash  then  erected  a  stele  near  Mugagir  detailing 
his  version  of  the  events.  Later,  perhaps  in  the  year  fol- 
lowing, a  fresh  expedition  by  the  Assyrians  again  succeeded 
in  reaching  the  place  and  partially  mutilated  this  record  of 
their  disgrace.*^ 

This  is  the  last  we  hear  of  Rusash.  His  work  was  done, 
and  Assyria  had  learned  that  Haldia  was  not  to  be  con- 
quered. He  died  about  711,  and  was  succeeded  by  his  son, 
Argishtish.  Under  this  new  ruler  new  conditions  arose 
which  must  be  discussed  in  a  later  chapter.'*^ 

"  Topsana  stele,  i6. 

"  D.  78  would  seem  to  indicate  another  invasion  of  Haldia  which 
took  place  after  the  alleged  death  of  Rusash.  But  this  is  identical 
with  S.  I.  42-45,  where  it  is  placed  after  the  capture  of  Mugagir,  but 
before  the  death  story.  Both  appear  to  be  abbreviations  of  the  badly 
mutilated  A.  132-137.  This  belongs,  not  to  Urzana,  as  a  first  glance 
might  indicate,  but  to  Rusash  himself.  Itti  at  the  beginning  of  132 
is  frequently  used  to  add  one  account  to  another.  Sums  of  money 
are  given.  "Ursa  their  king,"  136,  clearly  refers  back,  not  forward. 
The  account  ends  with  the  addition  of  the  land  of  Mashshi  to  Assyria 
and  the  placing  over  it  the  chief  of  the  palace.  Prism  B.  deals  in 
detail  with  this  expedition,  but  practically  nothing  can  be  gained,  as  the 
long  lists  of  booty  cannot  be  assigned  to  any  event  or  place. 
■  "  The  chronology  of  the  Armenian  campaigns  here  given  varies 
much   from  that  of  the   Annals.      It  has   already  been   seen,   Winckler, 


Il6  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

S argon,  XXII,  n.  2,  that  the  events  of  716  in  the  Annals  really  ex- 
tended over  several  years.  Prism  B.  has  references  to  Urartu  and  to 
Mannai  already  in  year  III,  719,  and  here  we  must  begin  the  wars. 
Unfortunately,  we  cannot  make  out  enough  of  year  IV,  718,  to  be  sure 
what  country  was  attacked.  Rm.  2,  97,  however,  helps  us  out,  for 
under  718  we  have  ana  a]lu(?)  Mannai,  "against  Mannai."  To  719  we 
must  attribute,  with  the  Annals,  the  revolt  of  the  towns  from  Iranzu. 
In  718,  we  would  have  the  death  of  Iranzu,  the  short  reigns  of  Aza 
and  of  Bagdatti,  and  the  accession  of  Ullusunu.  The  Annals  places  the 
Papa  and  Lallukna  episode  in  717.  More  probably  it,  too,  should  be  in 
718.  We  know  that  all  this  must  be  before  717,  for  the  Annals,  whose 
order  seems  generally  to  be  better  than  its  ascription  of  dates,  makes 
all  these  events  precede  the  expedition  against  Ashur  liu  of  Karalla, 
and  his  account  begins  year  V,  717,  in  Prism  B.  Here,  too,  belongs 
the  appointment  of  governors,  Rm.  2,  97.  We  place  therefore  the 
troubles  with  Ullusunu,  with  Ashur  liu,  and  with  Itti  in  717.  As 
we  have  thus  taken  one  year  earlier  in  the  Annals,  we  expect  that  the 
events  there  listed  under  715  really  belong  to  716.  This  is  confirmed 
by  Rm.  2,  97,  for  under  this  year  we  have  ?  di  (al)  Mugagir  Haldia. 
While  it  is  not  clear  just  what  this  means,  it  certainly  shows  that 
Haldia  and  Mugagir  were  the  center  of  attraction  in  that  year.  Prism 
B.  only  lets  us  know  that  Rusash  was  this  year  intriguing  in  Que. 
Following  our  plan  of  subtracting  one  year  from  the  Annals  date,  we 
would  place  the  great  Mugagir  war  in  715.  Rm.  2,  97,  disappoints  us  by 
no  reference  to  Haldia,  but  this  is  more  than  made  up  by  Prism  B.  where 
col.  III.  is  entirely  devoted  to  the  events  of  year  VII,  715,  and  deals 
only  with  Haldia  and  the  large  booty  taken  thence.  The  year  714 
would  then  be  free  for  the  expedition  of  Rusash  against  Assyria  men- 
tioned on  the  Topsana  stele,  Prism  B.  dealing  only  with  small  wars 
in  the  east,  while  Rm.  2,  97  has  nothing  at  all  of  a  military  nature. 
Then  713  would  do  for  the  return  trip  of  Sargon,  and  sure  enough  we 
have  a  mention  of  an  expedition  against  Mugagir  on  Rm.  2,  97  for 
this  year.  This  ended  the  Armenian  wars,  for  Rm.  2,  97  under  712 
has  ina  mati,  "  in  the  land."  About  this  time,  or  a  little  later,  Rusash 
probably  died. 


CHAPTER   VI 

THE  MEDIAN  WARS 

Judged  rather  by  their  results  than  by  the  details  of 
their  progress,  the  wars  with  the  Median  tribes,  begun  under 
Shalmaneser  II  in  836  and  carried  on  by  the  later  Assyrian 
kings  with  ever-decreasing  hopes  of  success,  deserve  a  large 
part  in  general  history.  Drifting  westward  as  petty  un- 
connected tribes,  at  war  often  with  each  other,  they  gradu- 
ally drove  in  or  conquered  the  more  or  less  Assyrianized 
tribes  along  the  eastern  frontier,  and  then  began  to  assail 
the  empire  itself.  For  a  time  the  better  trained  Assyrian 
soldiers  succeeded  in  beating  them  off,  but  the  task  was 
never-ending  and  the  drain  severe.  The  destruction  of  one 
clan  meant  only  room  for  another  to  expand  in,  while  all 
the  time  they  were  learning  from  the  enemy.  At  last  As- 
syria, now  defended  almost  exclusively  by  mercenaries,  them- 
selves of  Iranian  extraction  in  many  cases,  fell,  and  then  the 
collapse  of  Babylon  was  merely  a  question  of  time.  Yet  so 
thoroughly  had  they  been  transformed  by  the  contact  with 
their  more  civilized  neighbors  that,  when  at  last  they  had 
conquered  what  was  then  the  civilized  world,  they  were 
found  to  stand  for  almost  the  same  ideas  in  government  and 
social  life  as  did  those  who  had  preceded  them  in  the  way 
of  empire.  Here  we  have  an  interesting  parallel  in  the 
evolution  which  led  our  Germanic  ancestors  from  the  idea 
of  the  rude  chief  with  his  band  of  personal  attendants  to 
the  conception  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire.  Interesting, 
however,  as  a  study  of  these  general  movements  may  be,  the 

117 


Il8  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

details  of  this  constant  border  warfare  are  dry  to  study  and 
difficult  to  handle. 

Thanks  to  the  exertions  of  Tiglath  Pileser  III  and  to  the 
provincial  organization  he  brought  to  so  high  a  pitch  of 
efficiency,  Sargon  was  well  situated  as  regards  these  tribes. 
On  the  northeast  and  between  Arbela  and  Mugagir  was 
the  province  of  Kirruri  which  had  been  Assyrian  territory 
since  the  ninth  century.^  At  this  time  the  governor  was 
Shamash  upahhir.-  To  the  south  of  this  was  Parsuash,^ 
and  again,  to  the  south  of  this  last,  between  the  l-ower  Zab 
and  the  Diyala,  on  the  first  outliers  of  the  eastern  mountains, 
lay  that  of  Arapha,*  now  governed  by  Ishtar  Duri.^  To  the 
east  of  this  was  Lullume,®  an  ill-defined  province  in  the 

^For  Kirruri,  cf.  A.  Billerbeck,  Suleimania,  1898,  20  If.  This  elabo- 
rate and  painstaking  work  gives  references  to,  and  discusses  all  the 
sections  of,  the  inscriptions  dealing  with  this  frontier.  Naturally,  in 
such  pioneer  work,  the  identifications  can  only  be  approximate.  In 
the  case  of  the  regions  to  the  north,  they  are  to  be  considerably  cor- 
rected by  the  location  of  Mugagir  by  Belck,  cf.  chap.  V.  n.  ^2.  In 
this  very  case,  for  example,  he  places  Kirruri  with  its  center  at  the 
Kelishin   Pass.      It  is  rather  the  region  between   Mugagir  and  Arbela. 

^  That  Shamash  up  ahhir  was  governor  of  Kirruri  in  708  we  know 
from  Rm.  2,  97.  For  other  references,  cf.  Johns,  Deeds,  III.  112.  In 
his  list  of  governors,  II.  136,  Shamash  upahhir  should  be  read  for 
Shamash  bel  ugur.  It  is  of  course  not  proved  that  Shamash  upahhir 
was  governor  already  at  this  time,  but  it  seems  probable. 

'  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  60,  places  Parsua  in  the  Persian  region  of  Minde 
south  of  Lake  Urmia.  While  this  may  mark  the  extreme  limits  of 
the  region  called  by  that  name,  I  feel  that  the  province  was  much 
more  to  the  west.  We  know  from  A.  67  that  Parsuash  was  a  province 
at  this  time,  but  no  governor  is  known  by  name  till  much  later,  Johns, 
Deeds,  II.  137. 

*  Arapha  is  thus  located  by  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  68.  Its  correctness 
can  hardly  be  doubted. 

"For  Ishtar  Duri,  see  Johns,  Deeds,  III.  95;  cf.  also  II.  135.  He 
was  eponym  in  714. 

"  For  Lullume,  the  home  of  the  early  Lulli  people,  cf.  Billerbeck,  op. 
cit.,  7  /.      It  was  a  region  which  seems  never  to  have  been  very  clearly 


THE    MEDIAN    WARS  II9 

Shehrizor  highland,  whose  governor,  Sharru  emur  ani,"^ 
whose  residence  probably  was  at  the  modern  Suleimania, 
bore  the  brunt  of  the  conflict. 

We  may  now  take  up  the  operations  in  detail.  First  we 
have  the  operations  of  the  governor  of  Parsuash  (717).  A 
number  of  towns^  of  the  land  Niksama®  were  plundered, 
and  Sipu  sharru,  the  ruler  of  Shurgardia,  probably  a  re- 
volted subject,^^  was  captured.  Lying  as  they  did  on 
the  Parsuash  frontier,  they  were  naturally  added  to  that 
province. 

The  governor  next  advanced  to  Kishesim,^^  the  most 
important  town  in  the  Parsuash  region,  and  captured  and 
carried  off  the  komarch  Bel  shar  ugur,  whose  name  re- 
minds us  of  the  Biblical  Belshazzar.  The  site  of  Kishesim 
seemed  well  adapted  to  be  the  seat  of  a  province.  The 
name  was  accordingly  changed  to  Kar  Adar,  the  Ashur  cult 
introduced,  and  the  usual  stele  erected.  The  new  province 
whose  capital  Kar  Adar  became,  embraced  the  greater  part 
of  the  Parsuash  region.^^ 

defined.  As  a  province,  Lullume  seems  only  a  later  name  for  Mazamua, 
cf.  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  39  if.  The  last  reference  to  Mazamua  is  in 
7ZZ,  the  first  to  Lullume  in  712, 

^Sharru  emur  ani  was  governor  of  Lullume  in  712,  Johns,  Deeds, 
n.  136;  in.  188.  Prism  B.  expressly  ascribes  one  of  these  expeditions 
to  the  governor  of  Lullume,  see  below. 

*  These  were  Ganun  of  the  land  of  La(  ?)  and  six  towns  of  Niksama. 

'  Niksama  is  the  Sauch  Bulak  region,  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.^  95. 

^°  Winckler,   Gesch.,  242. 

"  Kishesim  is  placed  by  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  98,  at  the  great  ruins  of 
Shah  i  viran,  north  of  Sauch  Bulak,  at  Sikkis,  or  at  the  ruins  of  Siama 
between  Serdesht  and  Bane. 

"  So  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  97.  Prism  B.  repeats  some  of  these  facts 
and  adds  tribute  of  treasure,  horses,  and  mules.  Kishassu,  as  it  was 
then  called,  was  still  in  the  hands  of  the  Assyrians  in  the  last  days 
of  Esarhaddon,  K.  4668  =  Knudtzon  No.  i.  The  relief  Botta  I.  68, 
68,    cf.    Maspero,    Empires,    241,    represents    the    firing    and    capture    of 


I20  WESTERN   ASIA   IN    THE  DAYS   OF   SARGON 

Troubles  in  Harhar^^  next  engaged  the  attention  of  the 
governor.  Here  the  pro-Assyrian  feelings  of  the  komarch 
Kibaba  had  caused  his  expulsion,  and  Harhar  was  brought 
into  close  relation  to  Dalta  of  Elli.  As  that  individual  had 
not  yet  won  the  fame  of  a  "  loyal  vassal  who  loved  my 
yoke,"^*  praise  so  gladly  given  when  Dalta  was  dead  and 
the  strife  of  his  sons  gave  so  good  an  opportunity  for  inter- 
vention, this  was  considered  good  ground  for  similar  action 
here.  To  be  sure,  poor  Kibaba  was  not  reinstated.  In  fact, 
if  we  may  accept  one  account,^^  he  was  actually  made  captive 
himself.  The  city  of  Harhar,  defended,  as  one  of  the  reliefs 
shows,^^  by  an  isolated  rock  citadel  within  the  city,  which 
itself  was  surrounded  by  a  good-sized  stream,  was  taken 
and  plundered,  its  men  impaled,  and  the  usual  procedure  of 
setting  up  the  stele,  the  introducing  of  the  Ashur  cult,  and 
the  settling  of  foreigners,  gone  through,  while  the  name  of 

the  city  which  was  defended  by  high  triple  walls  with  crenallations. 
Winckler,  Gesch.,  242,  thinks  that  here,  as  in  the  case  of  Ashur  liu, 
the  Assyrian  name  means  a  revolted  governor.  But  it  only  shows 
Assyrian  or  perhaps  rather  Babylonian  influence. — Certain  other  lands 
were  also  added  to  the  province.  Bit  Sagbat  is  the  city  Sagbat  of  D. 
139  and  the  Bit  Sakbat  of  Tiglath  Pileser  III,  Clay  Tablet,  31.  Biller- 
beck,  op.  cit.,  92,  places  it  at  an  earlier  time  northeast  of  Lake  Zeribor ; 
but  at  this  time  it  was  more  to  the  south  on  the  Khorkhoran  and  upper 
Kisil  usen,  ib.,  96.  The  land  of  Bit  Umargi  is  compared,  Rost, 
Mitth.  Vorderasiatischer  Gesellschaft,  1897,  2,  87,  with  the 
Amyrgioi  of  Herod.  VII.  64  and  Steph.  Byz.,  s.  v.,  Amyrgion,  a 
Scythian  clan.  The  next  city  is  read  Hashubarban  by  Winckler,  Har 
Bagmashtum  by  Hiising,  in  Rost,  op.  cit.,  87.  The  other  cities  are 
Kilambati  and  Armangu.  In  A.  and  XIV,  they  are  called  "  lands," 
in  D.  60  "  towns."  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  97,  makes  their  conquest  due 
only  to  a  desire  to  protect  the  Parsua  province  against  the  Medes. 

"  Harhar  is  placed  by  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  63,  at  Hejaj  on  the  upper 
Dyala. 

"  D.  117. — The  statement  "Dalta  was  restored  to  favor,"  Maspero, 
op.  cit.,  242,  cannot  be  accepted. 

"D.  61. 

"  Botta  I.  55,  also  in  Maspero,  Empires,  357. 


THE   MEDIAN    WARS  121 

the  place  was  changed  to  Kar  Sharrukin,  or  Sargon's 
fortress.^^  To  the  province  thus  formed  were  added  the 
six  small  "  states  "  now  plundered  and  taken.^^  At  about  the 
same  time  the  governor  in  his  new  capital  received  the 
tribute  from  twenty-eight  komarchs  of  the  "mighty 
Medes."  " 

In  the  next  year,  716,  the  efforts  to  extend  the  province 
were  continued.  Some  of  the  towns  conquered  the  last 
year  were  again  forced  to  pay  tribute,  while  more  new  ones 
were  visited.-^    The  details  of  some  of  these  campaigns  are 

"  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  99  n.,  makes  the  statement  that  the  old  name 
Harhar  is  more  used  in  later  times  than  Kar  Sharrukin.  But  the 
latter  occurs  in  the  letter  Rm.  2,  464,  as  well  as  in  K.  609  =  H.  126, 
650  =  H.  128,  683  =:H.  556,  S.  167. 

"The  upper  canal  of  Aranzeshu,  the  Erinziashu  of  Tiglath  Pileser 
III,  Annals,  43,  in  the  region  either  of  the  Belad  Russ  stream,  or  the 
old  stream  between  the  Kisil  robat  and  the  Khanikhend  rud,  Biller- 
beck, op.  cit.,  75.  The  lower  canal  of  Bit  Ramatua,  the  Raraatea  of 
Tiglath  Pileser,  Annals,  44,  the  rich  region  between  the  Elvend  rud, 
the  Dyala,  and  the  Guovratro,  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  76  ;  Urikatu.  Sikris, 
the  Shikra  (ki)  of  the  Clay  Tablet,  32,  37 ;  Slab  II.  23,  perhaps  at 
Sirkuh  east  of  Kameron  and  north  of  Dinaver,  or  else  further  east  at 
Sirkau  at  the  south  foot  of  Elvend,  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  90.  Shaparda. 
Uriakku.  Here  too,  with  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  80  n.  2,  we  should  prob- 
ably place  the  reference  to  Ashtania  of  Bit  Sangibuti  in  A.  113  where 
it  is  clearly  out  of  place.  Billerbeck,  /.  c,  locates  it  in  the  Derud 
valley. 

"Whether  the  Medes,  the  "mighty"  Medes,  the  "distant"  Medes, 
and  the  "  Medes  of  the  region  of  the  eastern  Arabs "  are  all  of  the 
same  race  is  not  certain. 

^  We  have  again  mention  of  the  upper  and  lower  canals  of  Bit 
Sangibuti  which  takes  the  place  of  the  Bit  Ramatua  of  the  other  list, 
of  Upparia  which  stands  for  Uriakku,  of  Sikris,  of  Shuparda,  A.  83-84. 
Another  list,  A.  85-86,  gives  the  cities  of  Kaqunakinzarbara,  of 
Halbuknu,  of  Shu  .  .  .  al,  of  Anzaria,  a  region  on  the  lower  canal. 
Upparia,  the  Niparia  of  Tiglath  Pileser,  Slab  II,  22;  Clay  Tablet,  31, 
is  placed  by  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  90,  south  of  the  Gabe  rud  and  east  of 
Shaho  Dagh.  It  occurs  in  Prism  A.  as  Uppuria.  Shuparda  would 
appear  to  be  the  Sapardai  of  Knudtzon  11,  mentioned  with  the  Mannai 


122  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

shown  in  the  bas-rehefs  which  once  adorned  the  palace  of 
Sargon.  On  one-^  we  see  Kindau,  a  town  with  high  walls 
around  a  great  central  tower.  It  is  situated  in  a  swamp 
across  which  a  causeway  leads  to  the  town.  On  another^^ 
we  see  Gauguhtu,  a  city  on  a  hill  with  double  walls  against 
which  mining  operations  are  being  carried  on.  A  third^^ 
shows  us  Kisheshlu  with  its  double  wall  around  a  rocky  hill 
surrounded  by  water,  with  three  battering  rams  working 
against  them.  These  cities,  once  taken,  were  given  Assy- 
rian names  and  formed  into  Assyrian  municipalities.^*  Kar 
Sharrukin  was  again  strengthened  against  the  Medes,  who 
still  remained  dangerous,  even  if  twenty-two  chiefs  did  send 
presents.-^ 

Indeed,  the  operations  continued  the  next  year,  715.    The 

as  well  as  with  the  Persian  Sparda  which  has  generally  been  identified 
with  the  Sepharad  of  Obadiah,  20. 

^Botta  I.  61. 

^  Botta  II.  28.  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  102,  compares  the  Ginhuhtu  of 
Shamshi  Adad.  III.  58,  but  this  is  in  the  north. 

^^  Botta,  II,  147. — These  places  are  located  northeast  and  east  of 
Shehrizor,  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  102. 

^*  These  were  Kisheshlu,  Kinddau,  Auzaria,  Bit  Bagaia  (var.  Bit 
Gabaiia),  their  names  being  changed  to  Kar  Nabu,  Kar  Siu,  Kar  Adad, 
Kar  Ishtar.  We  have  sculptures  of  Ganguhtu,  ?ambarukur(  ?),  Sinn, 
?ikrakka,  Kindau,  Kisheshlu,  Bit  Bagaia.  Rost,  op.  cit.,  86  n.  i,  com- 
pares the  Persian  Bagaios  of  Herod.  Ill,  128.  Does  the  variation 
between  Bagaia  and  Gabaia  indicate  confusion  caused  by  an  Aramaean 
scribe  accustomed  to  write  from  right  to  left? 

^A.  89,  cf.  D.  66. — The  campaign  ended  with  the  capture  of  twenty- 
five  hundred  men  from  Kimirra,  a  city  of  Bit  Hamban.  A  Bit 
Su-?-za(?)  is  also  mentioned.  Bit  Hamban  or  Habban  is  in  the  Hurin 
valley  northwest  of  Zohab,  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  14.  These  references 
to  Bit  Hanban,  Namri,  Hashmar  in  the  introductions  are  probably  not 
to  be  taken  seriously,  as  they  seem  to  be  only  learned  touches.  Biller- 
beck, op.  cit.,  104,  sees  in  the  whole  series  of  movements  a  reconnaissance 
in  force  of  the  passes  along  the  Susian  border  in  preparation  for  a 
Susian  campaign.  I  believe  my  reconstruction  much  more  nearly 
represents  the  truth. 


THE    MEDIAN    WARS  I  23 

Mannai  and  Elli  were  once  more  forced  to  pay  tribute,  as 
well  as  certain  princelets  who  had  never  done  the  like  to  the 
kings,  his  fathers.^^  The  main  event  of  the  year,  however, 
was  the  defeat  of  Mitatti  of  Zikirtu,-^  who  had  twice  con- 
spired to  raise  a  revolt  among  the  Mannai.  At  last,  an 
attempt  was  made  thoroughly  to  root  out  the  Zikirtai. 
Their  three  strong  places,  their  twenty-four  towns,  even 
their  capital,  Parda,  was  taken,  plundered,  and  burned. 
Mitatti  was  forced  to  flee,  and  "  his  place  of  abode  was  not 
found."  ^^  A  few  years  later  Zikirtai  was  once  more  in 
revolt. 

Thus  far  we  seem  to  be  dealing  only  with  the  unknown 
governor  of  Parsuash.  In  714  we  learn  of  the  operations  of 
Sharru  emur  ani,  the  governor  of  LuUume.^^  As  a  result 
of  the  troubles  of  717,  Karalla  had  been  made  part  of  the 

^A.  loi  if.      Only  Ziziragala  is  mentioned  by  name. 

"  The  identification  of  Zikirtu  with  the  Persian  clan  Sargartioi, 
Herod.  I.  125,  is  now  accepted. 

^*A.  107,  paraphrased  by  Maspero,  Empires,  24,7,  "disappeared  from 
the  pages  of  history."  Just  below,  A.  106,  adi  is  "  samt,"  not  '"de- 
serted by"  as  Maspero,  /.  c.  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  103,  places  here  D.  70. 
We  may  note  in  this  place  the  Zikirtian  town  of  Ki-  ?-bi  of  the 
sculptures. — The  list  of  Median  princelings  in  Prism  A.  has  been  placed 
in  various  years  by  various  authors.  On  that  prism  it  occurs  just 
after  the  Dalta  episode.  If  we  may  trust  that  document,  and  I  thinly 
we  may,  I  do  not  see  where  else  we  can  place  it  than  here,  for  we 
have  a  suitable  tribute  of  the  Medes  and  the  main  Dalta  story  just 
previous.  The  list  has  been  so  well  studied  by  Rost,  Mitth. 
Vorderasiat.  Gesellsch.,  1897,  2,  iii  if.,  that  I  shall  merely  refer  to  it  and 
not  repeat  the  names.  The  identifications  with  places  mentioned  in 
Ptolemy  and  other  classical  authors  are  numerous.  Where  the  list 
throws  light  on  other  matters,  it  is  quoted.  On  Luh  barbari,  however, 
cf.  also  Johns,  Deeds,  III.  413,  where  it  is  explained  "jackal's  jaw." 
A  comparison  there  given  of  various  place  names  from  a  root  Ih'  is 
more  valuable  perhaps. 

^  Prism  B.  states  that  this  region  was  handed  over  to  the  governor 
of  Lullume  who  was  Sharru  emur  anni,  as  Johns,  Deeds^  III.  188, 
shows.      He  was  eponym  in  712. 


124  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

province.^^  Under  Amitashshi,  the  brother  of  the  unfor- 
tunate Ashur  liu,  the  natives  rose  and  drove  out  their  As- 
syrian oppressors.  Sharru  emur  ani  returned  with  an  army, 
and  a  battle  was  fought  on  the  mountain  called  Ana.^^  The 
people  of  Karalla  were  defeated  and  Amitashshi,  bound 
hand  and  foot,  was  carried  off  to  Assyria,  while  two  thou- 
sand of  his  troops  were  forced  to  take  service  in  the  royal 
armv.^2  Bit  Daiukku  and  the  surrounding  lands  were 
raided  and  plundered,  and  the  whole  of  the  newly-conquered 
region  added  to  the  Lullume  province.^^ 

At  about  the  same  time  operations  were  carried  on  along 
the  Elli  frontier,  perhaps  by  Sharru  emur  ani,  more  prob- 
ably by  Ishtur  Duri,  the  governor  of  Arapha.^*    Dalta^''  had 

^°  The  passage  in  A.  68  is  mutilated,  but  this  formation  of  a  province 
is  proved  by  A.  140  ff. 

^^  The  name  of  the  mountain  is  written  An-a.  This  is  probably  the 
correct  reading,  but  one  suspects  the  possibility  of  some  folk  etymology 
connected  with  the  other  values  of  An,  shatnu,  "  heaven,"  then  a 
"  mountain  heaven  high "  or  ilu,  "  god,"  a  "  mountain  of  the  gods." 
Both  are  unlikely. 

'^A.  141  ff.      Sculp.,  i.,  VIII.  17,  B,  14. 

^  This  Bit  Daiukku  of  A.  140  has  clear  affinities  with  Deiokes,  as  does 
the  Daiukku  already  discussed,  cf.  chap.  V.  n.  24.  Winckler,  Unter- 
such.,  117,  accepts  the  connection  with  the  latter,  but  not  with  the 
former. — A.  140-57  seems  to  fall  into  three  sections  corresponding  to 
the  Elli,  Bit  Daiukku,  and  Karalla  of  A.  139-40.  As  A.  140-43 
belongs  to  the  last  and  152-57  to  the  first,  the  remainder  must  belong 
to  the  other.  These  lines  are  too  mutilated  for  Winckler  to  translate. 
We  have  here  a  plunder  of  the  land  of  Mapatira,  a  reference  to  Elli, 
and  something  done  to  or  for  Azuk.  In  the  version  of  Hall  V,  we 
have  references  to  the  land  of  Mi-?-ku,  of  ?-me- ?melu-hal,  and  two 
others,  and  to  the  city  of  Hubahme.  In  Prism  B.  we  have  Rakkairi 
and  Irakka  who  seem  to  be  some  sort  of  foreign  officials  sent  with  the 
tribute  of  Amitashshi.  The  land  was  handed  over  to  the  governor  of 
Lullume  and  tribute  inflicted  on  Kirhi,  Karalla,  and  Namri. 

^For  full  account  of  Elli,  see  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  157  ff.  The  name 
is  written  Ellipi  or  EUibi,  but  this  last  part  is  only  the  plural  sign, 
Billerbeck,  /.  c. 

^''  Dalta  is  interpreted  by  Justi,  Nanienhuch,  s.  v.,  as  the  "  supporter 


THE    MEDIAN    WARS  125 

now  changed  his  poUcy ;  for  the  revolt  of  five  of  his  border 
districts,  seemingly  to  the  Elamitish  ruler,  had  forced  him 
to  invite  the  Assyrians  to  assist  him.  The  Assyrians  ac- 
cepted gladly  and  secured  the  districts  in  question,  but  there 
is  no  proof  that  they  were  ever  returned  to  Dalta.  Elli 
was  now  brought  fairly  within  the  Assyrian  sphere  of  in- 
fluence, and  only  the  death  of  Dalta  was  needed  to  produce 
actual  intervention.^^ 

In  this  connection  we  are  told  of  tribute  received  by  the 
governor  of  Parsuash.  This  was  probably  not  all  taken  in 
one  year.  It  must  rather  represent  the  relations  of  that 
official  with  the  tribes  to  the  east  during  the  interval  for 
which  we  have  no  other  history.  Certain  it  is  that  we  can- 
not see  here  actual  expeditions  in  the  field.     Among  the 

of  the  state."  If  this  is  correct,  then  we  have  a  Median  ruling  race 
among  the  old  Anzanitish  peoples,  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  162. 

^A.  152  if.  is  badly  mutilated,  D.  70  ff.  is  less  full,  the  Prisms  add 
a  little.  In  both,  he  is  called  malik  or  "  prince."  There  seems  to  be 
a  reference  to  the  princes  of  Haldini.  Or  should  we  read  Haldinishe 
and  see  in  the  last  sign  the  Haldian  nominative?  He  took  upon  him- 
self the  ilqu  or  feudal  obligation  of  [Rusash],  but  when  Sargon  came, 
took  to  a  high  mountain  from  which  he  was  brought  down,  K.  560  = 
H.  227  is  a  letter  from  Nergal  etir,  perhaps  the  well-known  astrologer, 
concerning  a  messenger  from  Dalta  who  has  come  before  the  king  on 
business  apparently  connected  with  horses.  This  has  already  been 
referred  to  Sargon  by  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  149.  In  K.  526  =:  H.  226  = 
Delitzsch,  Beitr.  z.  Assyr.,  I,  202  if.,  the  same  official  states  that  a  man 
detailed  from  the  body  guard  came  on  the  sixth  of  Airu  and  the  horses 
were  brought  on  the  next  day.  The  two  seem  to  go  together. — Biller- 
beck, op.  cit.,  105,  who  thinks  that  all  troubles  here  were  connected 
with  Susa,  makes  this  an  attempt  of  the  Assyrian  general  staff  to  learn, 
by  a  reconnaissance  in  force,  the  practicability  of  certain  passes  leading 
into  Elam.      But  local  conditions  sufficiently  explain  all  the  movements. 

K.  665  =  H.  194  a  letter  from  Naid  ilu  refers  to  D]alta  in  an  un- 
certain connection.  The  writer  refers  to  the  collecting  of  Bit  Ukanai, 
if  the  name  is  to  be  so  read,  and  asks  that  a  letter  be  sent  regarding 
Sharru  emur  anni,  the  eponym  of  712,  who  was  governor  of  Lullume 
and  as  such  charged  with  the  pacification  of  this  region,  cf.  n.  29. 


126  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

tribes  which  sent  presents  were  those  of  the  Bikni^'  or 
Demavend  region,  clearly  near  the  Caspian  and  as  clearly 
in  a  region  where  no  Assyrian  army  ever  penetrated.^* 
These  were  next  neighbors  to  the  somewhat  mysterious 
Arabs  of  the  east^^  and  of  the  land  of  Nagira**'  of  the 

^  These  were  the  city  of  Erishtana,  the  Diristanu  of  D.  67,  with  the 
towns  around  it  in  the  land  of  Ba'it  ili,  a  region  of  Media  in  the  land 
of  EUi,  according  to  Sayce,  Records  of  the  Past^V.  153,  the  country  about 
Bisutun,  but  better  taken  with  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  106  n.  i,  as  the 
region  about  Kirmanshah ;  the  lands  of  Absahutti ;  Parnuatti ;  Utirna ; 
Uriakki ;  Rimanuti,  a  region  of  Uppuria,  Uiadane  ;  Bustus,  also  Tiglath 
Pileser,  Clay  Tablet,  31  ;  Slab,  II.  22,  according  to  Billerbeck,  /.  c. 
Takht  i  Bostan  or  rather  the  region  to  the  south  of  it  about  Bisutun 
for  which  see  Steph,  Byz.,  s.  v.,  Bagisiana ;  Azazi,  according  to  Rost, 
op.  cit.,  83,  the  Azaza  of  Ptol.  VI.  2.  8,  but  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  105, 
places  Azazi  and  Uaidame  about  Kirmanshah  and  the  rich  region  of 
Dinaver  and  Kasr  i  Shirin ;  Ambanda,  according  to  Justi,  Beitr.  zur 
Alien  Geog.  Persiens,  1869,  I.  23,  quoted  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  105  n.  2, 
is  the  Achaemenian  Kampanda,  the  present  Chamabadan  on  the  upper 
Gamas  ab,  but  according  to  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  106  n.  3,  it  is  about 
Nehavend  where  there  are  important  ruins  ;  Dananu  the  Zangun  south- 
east of  Doletabad,  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  106  n.  4;  these  last  three  are 
distant  regions  bordering  on  the  "eastern  Arabs."     A.  158  if.     D.  67  if. 

^  Bikni  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Annals,  a  proof  of  its  being  "  learned." 
It  seems  to  be  the  Demavend,  Winckler,  Sargon,  XXVII  n.  3.  Rost, 
op.  cit.,  77,  compares  the  Abakaina  of  Ptol.  VI.  2.  17. 

^  These  eastern  Aribi  are  very  puzzling.  Delitzsch,  Kossder,  II.  n.  3, 
takes  Aribi  as  a  general  word  for  nomad  and  compares  the  "  Arabian  " 
dynasty  of  Berossus  which  is  really  Kossaean.  I  suspect  there  is  some 
truth  in  this  view.  Finzi,  Ricerche,  514  /.,  quoted  by  A.  Delattre, 
Medes.,  1883,  106,  compares  the  Aribes  of  Strabo.  XV.  2.  i,  and  of 
Dionysius  Periegetes  1096.  For  these  Aribes,  Arbies,  etc.,  of  the  east, 
see  the  full  discussion  in  note,  Geog.  Minor es,  I.  335.  Delattre,  /.  c, 
compares  with  more  probability  the  Arabians  of  Iran  who  were  forced 
to  submit  to  Seleucus,  Appian,  Syriaca,  55.  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  108, 
would  find  their  descendants  in  the  nomad  races  who  still  wander  in 
winter  to  the  salt  marshes  of  Tushu  Gol  near  Sultanabad,  but  in  the 
summer  come  far  west,  nearly  to  the  frontier, 

*°Nagiru  is  placed  by  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  107,  about  Kengovar  Tulan 
and  the  region  Mekhoran  near  the  head  of  the  Gamas  rud. 


THE    MEDIAN    WARS  12/ 

''  mighty  "  Mandai*^  who  had  thrown  off  the  yoke  of  Ashur 
and  were  encamped  on  mountain  and  steppe.  The  tribute 
received  from  Ullusunu  of  Mannai  and  of  Adar  aplu  iddin 
was  more  in  the  nature  of  the  real  thing.  But,  again,  in  the 
tribute  of  several  thousand  horses  and  mules,  sheep  and 
cattle  sent  in  by  forty-five  chiefs  of  the  "mighty"  Medes, 
we  have  only  the  usual  presents.*- 

Only  once  more  does  there  seem  to  have  been  trouble 
along  this  frontier,  and  then  it  was  not  serious.  By  708 
Dalta  of  Elli  had  ''gone  the  way  of  death,"  and  his  two 
sons,  Nibe  and  Ishpabara,''^  contested  his  throne.  Nibe 
called  in  Shutruk  nahunta,  none  the  worse  it  would  seem 
for  his  Assyrian  wars,  while  his  brother  summoned  Sargon. 
Shutruk  nahunta  sent  four  thousand  five  hundred  bowmen 
to  garrison  Elli,  but  the  seven  generals  of  Sargon  won  the 
day.    The  capital,  Marubishtu,^*  situated  on  a  high  moun- 

"  It  is  tempting  to  connect  the  Mandai  with  the  Umman  Manda  of 
the  later  inscriptions  or  even  with  the  Mandaeans  or  so-called  Sabaeans. 
Neither  is  at  all  probable.  Winckler,  Sargon,  XXVII.  n.  3,  has 
shown  that  they  are  Medes.  I  would  go  a  step  further  and  suggest 
that  Mandai  dannuti  is  a  mere  error  for  Madai  danniiti,  the  ''  power- 
ful "  Medes.  Did  the  scribe  start  to  write  Mannai  ?  Winckler,  Forsch., 
II.  74,  sees  in  Sharrakish,  "  desert,"  the  first  use  of  Saracen.  But 
it  would  be  certainly  curious  to  find  it  first  used  in  Media. 

"A.  162  ff.;  D.  69.  Prism  B.  gives  to  this  year  also  an  expedition 
against  the  land  of  Bagris  and  the  leader  of  the  opposition  was  brought 
to  Sargon. — Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  106  if.,  has  worked  out  an  elaborate 
system  of  campaigning,  parallel  columns  and  all  the  rest.  The  vital 
objection  to  all  this  is  that  we  have  to  do,  not  with  real  expeditions, 
but  merely  with  tribute  presentations. 

**  Justi,  Namenbuch,  s.  v.,  makes  Nibe  the  old  Persian  waiha,  the 
Pahlevi  Niwika,  and  Ishpabara  or  Ashpabara  the  Astibares  of  Ctesias 
and  a  number  of  other  Iranian  forms  all  meaning  "  Ritter." — In  K. 
1025  =  H.  159,  Eshtar  duri  sends  the  king  certain  information  about 
the  cavalry  of  Nibe.      The  rest  is  too  mutilated  for  translation. 

"Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  127,  compares  with  Marubishti  the  region 
Mahidesht.  He  locates  it  between  Kirmanshah  and  Hulelan,  at  the 
pass  south  of  Kargan. 


128  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

tain,  was  captured  and  rebuilt,  Nibe  made  prisoner,  and 
Ishpabara  placed  on  the  throne."*^ 

The  revolt  of  Ishpabara  only  six  years  later*®  is  only  one 
indication  among  many  of  the  untenable  position  the  As- 
syrians held  in  Media.  The  attempt  to  hold  back  the  ad- 
vancing Median  hordes  was  an  impossible  one,  but  Sargon 
did  what  he  could  and  at  least  somewhat  postponed  the  evil 
day. 

"A.  402  if.;  D.  117  ff. 

*"  Prism  II.  8  fF.  The  prayers,  Knudtzon  23,  75,  etc.,  show  that  by 
the  time  of  Esarhaddon,  Elli  was  entirely  lost. 

*^  In  the  account  of  the  Median  wars,  I  have  again  followed  the 
chronology  of  Prism  B.  in  preference  to  that  of  the  Annals,  thus  placing 
the  events  one  year  earlier  than  is  usually  done.  The  only  additional 
evidence  is  to  be  gained  from  Rm.  2,  97,  where  an  expedition  against 
Elli  is  given  for  715.  This  agrees  well  enough  with  Prism  B.  Nat- 
urally, any  definite  chronology  of  such  continuous  frontier  wars  must 
be  somewhat  artificial. 


CHAPTER   VII 

THE  ELAMITISH   WARS  AND  THE  CONQUEST  OF  BABYLON 

The  campaigns  of  Sargon,  after  the  first  Babylonian 
troubles,  fall  into  a  definite  series  of  movements.  First 
came  the  settlement  of  Syrian  affairs,  then  the  advances 
on  the  northwest  frontier  and  the  struggles  with  Rusash 
and  Midas.  After  this  there  had  been  no  great  movements, 
but  constant  wars  along  the  Median  and  Asia  Minor  fron- 
tiers had  exercised  the  troops  as  well  as  extended  the  boun- 
daries. At  the  same  time  an  opportunity  was  given  for 
recuperation  and  for  preparation  for  new  wars. 

The  Median  wars  had  already  shown  the  influence  of 
Shutur  nahundi,  who  had  ruled  in  Elam  since  717.^  In 
Babylon,  too,  it  was  Elamitish  support  which  helped  to  keep 
Merodach  Baladan  on  the  throne,  and  a  movement  to  re- 
cover the  old  sacred  city  could  not  be  better  begun  than  by 
an  attempt  to  disable  the  usurper's  ally.^  Shutur  nahundi 
held  the  same  place  in  the  affairs  of  the  southeast  as  did 
Rusash  in  the  north,  Midas  on  the  northwest,  and  Egypt  on 
the  southwest.  Around  each  all  the  disaffection  of  that 
section  centered  and  a  conquest  of  each  was  essential  to  a 
lasting  peace  on  that  frontier. 

^  Bab.  Chron.,  I.  38  if.  These  lines  are  found  in  Delitzsch, 
Lesestiicke*  not  in  the  earlier  editions.  He  is  there  called  Ishtar 
hundu.  The  native  name  is  Shutruk  nahunta,  cf.,  e.  g.,  the  brick  in 
M.  Dieulafoy,  L'Acropole  de  Suse,  1893,  31 1-  The  Assyrian  form  is 
Shutur  nahundi. 

^  Lenormant,  Les  Premieres  Civilizations,  II.  202,  made  him  a  Baby- 
lonian  patriot.       Delattre,   Rev.    Quest.   Hist.,    1877,    I.    538,    and   later 
writers  go  to  the  other  extreme  and  make  him  a  tyrant.      It  is  only 
fair  to  read  both  sides  of  the  case. 
9  129 


130  WESTERN   ASIA   IN    THE  DAYS   OF   SARGON 

It  was  therefore  as  a  preliminary  to  the  conquest  of 
Babylon  that  Elam  was  invaded.^  Confused  though  the 
accounts  are,  we  can  yet,  by  the  aid  of  the  topography,  give 
a  fairly  correct  account  of  the  operations.  One  division 
moved  down  southeast  behind  the  Hamrin  Hills,  the  first 
important  elevation  beyond  the  Babylonian  plain,  and  at- 
tacked Dur  Athara,*  a  Gambulu  fort  only  sixty  miles  from 
Susa  itself  and  on  the  direct  road  between  that  city  and 
Babylon.  This  important  post  had  already  been  fortified 
by  Merodach  Baladan  and  was  now  still  more  strengthened. 
Its  walls  were  raised,  a  canal  from  the  Surappu^  river  drawn 
about  it,  and  a  force  of  four  hundred  infantry  and  six  hun- 
dred cavalry  thrown  in.  In  spite  of  all  this  preparation,  the 
fort  was  quickly  taken,  before  nightfall,  the  scribes  of  Sar- 
gon  boast, — and  the  usual  prisoners  and  booty  of  live  stock 
carried  off.^  If  the  plan  of  Sargon  had  been  to  advance 
from  here  direct  upon  Susa,  he  was  doomed  to  disappoint- 
ment, for  the  road,  though  short,  was  too  rough  for  an  army 

-  These  campaigns  have  been  worked  out  in  detail  by  Billerbeck  in 
his  Susa,  1893.  He  has  since,  in  his  Suleimania,  1898,  changed  his 
opinion  on  certain  points,  but  has  not  gone  over  again  the  ground  in 
detail.  As  in  the  case  of  the  Median  wars,  the  excellence  of  his  work 
must  be  admitted  without  believing  that  the  last  word  has  been  said. 

*  Billerbeck,  Susa,  80,  first  placed  Dur  Athara  on  the  Mendeli.  Later 
he  placed  it  more  to  the  south  at  Sebo'a  Kherib,  Suleimania,  113  n,  — . 
Maspero,  Empires,  256  n.  4,  seems  to  have  arrived  independently  at 
the  same  conclusion.      In  all  probability,  it  is  correct. 

^  The  Surappu  has  been  identified  with  the  Umm  el  Jemal  by 
Delitzsch,  Paradies,  195,  and  the  Kekha  by  Delattre,  Les  Travaux,  39 
n.  4,  cited  by  Maspero,  /.  c.  Neither  is  probable.  Billerbeck,  Mitth. 
Vorderasiat.  Gesellsch.,  1898,  2,  28,  reconstructs  the  rivers  of  south 
Babylonia  in  ancient  times  and  makes  the  Tigris  of  that  time  the 
Shatt  el  Hai,  while  the  present  lower  Tigris  is  made  the  Surappu.  I 
am  more  inclined  to  agree  with  Maspero,  /.  c,  in  making  it  the  Tib; 
for  this  is  the  river  naturally  to  be  used,  if  Dur  Athara  is  to  be  placed, 
with  Billerbeck  himself,  at   Sebo'a  Kherib. 

«  A.  245  if. 


ELAMITISH    WARS    AND    CONQUEST   OF    BABYLON  I3I 

easily  to  traverse  it  even  in  time  of  peace,  while  in  the  face 
of  an  enemy  it  was  utterly  impossible."^ 

Something,  however,  had  been  accomplished.  The  direct 
road  between  Susa  and  Babylon  was  held  by  Dur  Athara 
which  was  made  the  capital  of  a  new  province,  while  Dur 
ilu  held  the  Susians  back  from  a  return  attack  on  Assyria. 
With  the  new  capital  as  a  base,  further  advances  were  made. 
One  detachment,  perhaps  trying  to  go  around  the  south  end 
of  the  Hamrin  chain  and  so  attack  Susa  on  the  flank,  in- 
vaded the  Uknu  region,^  where,  among  their  reed  beds  and 
swamps,  the  natives  felt  secure.^  Nevertheless,  their  towns 
were  taken  and  eight  chiefs  came  forth  from  their  retreat 
and  paid  tribute  in  livestock.^^  All  the  region  thus  far 
taken  was  made  a  new  province,  that  of  Gambulu,  with  Dur 
Athara,  now  called  Dur  Nabu,  as  its  capital.  The  nomads 
were  ordered  to  settle,^^  and  a  cash  tribute  added  to  a  tax 
of  one  out  of  twenty  from  their  flocks.  This  province  seems 
to  have  been  well  Assyrianized,  and  Dur  Nabu,  unlike  most 
of  these  re-christenings,  long  retained  that  name.  Years 
later,  when  Gambulian  exiles  are  found  settled  near  Harran, 
we  find  a  Dur  Nabu  as  one  of  their  foundations.^^ 

Next  came  the  attempt  to  extend  the  province  to  the 
south  as  well  as  to  the  southeast,  a  movement  of  importance, 

'Thus  Billerbeck,  Suleimania,  114. 

'Delitzsch,  op.  cit.,  194,  identified  the  Uknu  with  the  Kerkha  and  this 
has  been  generally  followed.  The  region  here  indicated  seems  to  be  the 
lower  swamps  of  that  stream,  the  Shatt  el  Jamus,  so  called  from  the 
buffaloes  spending  the  day  there  with  only  their  noses  out  of  the 
water. 

*This  we  learn  from  H.      Cf.  Peiser,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,   1889,  412. 

"These  were  Ba(?)ar(?)— ;  Hazailu,  cf.  Johns,  Deeds,  III.  453; 
Handanu;  Zabidu;  Amai,  cf.  the  city  Ama  of  A.  275;  la — ;  Amelu 
sharru  iddin ;  Aisam.mu. 

"  So  it  would  seem  from  A.  254  if. 

"Johns,  Doomsday  Book,  2,  I.  19;  cf.  4.  III.  18. 


132  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

as  it  brought  the  army  close  to  the  ancestral  home  of  Mero- 
dach  Baladan.  Here  was  captured  Qarad  Nanni,  a  town  of 
Nabu  ugalla,  six  regions  of  the  Gambulu,  and  four  of  their 
strongholds.^^  Then,  moving  northeast,  he  attacked  some 
of  the  greater  tribes  of  the  country,  the  Ru'a,^*  the  Pu- 
qudu,^^  the  latburu,^®  and  the  Hindaru.  From  the  two 
somewhat  different  accounts  which  the  scribe  has  neglected 
to  amalgamated^  we  learn  that  they  fled  by  night  and  occu- 
pied the  morasses  of  the  Uknu.  The  Assyrian  army  first 
devastated  their  land  and  cut  down  their  main  means  of 
support,  the  date  palms.  Then  they  advanced  into  the 
swamp  where  they  found  the  Dupliash^®  dammed  and  forti- 

"  These  were  the  Husiqanu,  Tarbugati,  Tibarsunu,  Pashur,  an  un- 
known land,  Hirutu,  Hilmun.  For  the  last,  cf.  the  Hillimmu  of  D.  20. 
Winckler  in  his  transliteration  gives  a  break  between  263  and  264. 
This  is  unjustified.  In  XII,  the  text  is  continuous,  while  in  the  other 
the  six  named  lands  of  the  one  line  correspond  with  the  VI  nage  of 
the  next. 

"According  to  Glaser,  Skizze,  1890,  408,  the  Re'u  of  Gen.  11". — K.  530 
=  H.  158  is  from  Ishtar  duri,  the  well-known  official.  It  describes  how 
Nabu  zer  ibni,  chief  of  the  Rua,  has  escaped  from  Damascus  from  Bel 
duri  who  seems  to  have  been  the  governor  of  that  place.  The  name  of 
the  man  he  escaped  to  is  mostly  gone  ;  but  traces  allow  us  to  restore 
Merodach  Baladan  who  is  mentioned  later.  He  fled  to  the  city  Abdudi 
and  his  men  met  him.  Just  what  the  operations  next  described  were 
the  mutilated  state  of  the  text  does  not  allow  us  to  learn,  but  Me 
Turnat  seems  to  have  been  surrounded.  Some  sort  of  a  victory  is 
probable  where  some  were  captured  and  settled. 

"  The  Peqod  of  Ezek.  23=^. 

"latbur  was  a  rather  ill-defined  region  extending  along  the  Elamitish 
foothills.  Billerbeck,  Suleimania,  map,  brings  it  nearly  as  far  north 
as  the  Dyala ;  but  this  is  certainly  too  far  north  for  our  present  opera- 
tions. 

"  A.   264-71  :=  271-78. 

"The  name  of  the  stream  generally  given  as  Umliash  is  read,  prob- 
ably correctly,  by  Billerbeck,  Mitth.  Vorderasiat.  Gesellsch.,  1898,  2, 
Dupuliash,  Dupliash,  on  the  basis  of  K.  1146,  Winckler,  Sammlung, 
II.  43,  a  letter  from  a  chief  of  Nar  Tupuli'ash  to  the  king,  perhaps  to 
be  placed  here,  Billerbeck,  ib.      Billerbeck,  /.  c,  makes  it  the  Duwary. 


ELAMITISH    WARS    AND    CONQUEST   OF    BABYLON  1 33 

fied  by  two  strongholds.  An  indecisive  battle  was  fought, 
but  surrender  was  finally  forced  by  starvation.  Fourteen 
towns  on  the  banks  of  the  Uknu, — the  names  differ  in  the 
two  versions," — presented  their  tribute  of  livestock  to  the 
governor  in  Dur  Athara.  Hostages  were  taken,  taxes  as- 
sessed, and  they,  too,  became  part  of  the  new  province.^^ 

Parallel  with  all  these  operations  of  one  corps  were  those 
of  another,  which  had  its  base  at  Dur  ilu,  and  which  directed 
its  attention  to  the  country  to  the  north  of  Elam  proper, 
where  Elamitish  influence  was  still  strong.  Here  again  we 
have  two  conflicting  versions.^^  Two  important  places, 
Sam'una^^  and  Bab  duri,^^  were  .taken,  though  whether  they 

"  The  first  version  has  lanuku  of  Zame ;  Nabu  ugalla  of  Qarad 
Nanni,  according  to  H.  2  but  now  of  Abure ;  Pashshunu  and  Haukanu 
of  Nuhanu;  Sa'lu,  a  man  in  A.  268,  a  city  in  275  (C),  Sahalu,  275 
(XIII),  of  Ibulu.  All  these  were  chiefs  of  the  Puqudu.  Abhata 
of  the  Ru'a ;  Huninu,  Same',  Sapharu,  Rapi',  from  the  Hindaru.  In 
the  other  list  we  have  Zame,  Abure,  laptiru,  Mahigu,  Hilipanu,  Dandan, 
Pattianu,  Haimanu,  Gadiati,  Nuhanu,  Ama,  Hiuru,  Sa'lu.  In  spite 
of  the  differences,  we  have  here  clearly  two  accounts  of  the  same 
campaign. 

^  While  these  conquests  are  frequently  mentioned  in  the  introductions 
of  the  various  display  inscriptions,  cf.  Billerbeck,  /.  c,  35  ff.,  there  is 
a  detailed  and  consecutive  account  only  in  the  Annals.  I  have 
followed  Maspero,  Empires,  256,  rather  than  Billerbeck,  Susa,  80, 
Suleimania,  117  ff.,  in  my  location.  I  do  not  see  how  these  tribes  can 
be  placed  further  north  than  I  have  done.  The  references  to  the 
marshes  of  the  Uknu  and  to  the  palms  seem  to  me  to  leave  no  other 
alternative.  In  the  text,  I  have  followed  the  account  of  the  Annals. 
But  I  am  not  sure  that  all  these  do  not  refer  to  one  series  of  more 
or  less  connected  fights  in  the  swamps.  The  Labdudu, — or  should  we 
read  Kaldudu? — are  mentioned  only  in  P.  IV.  72;  D.  18,  cf.  K.  4286, 
Johns,  Deeds,  II.  171,  and  83-1-18,  215,  Winckler,  Forsch.,  II  3  if. 
K.  1023  =  H.  798  from  Shamash  bel  ugur  refers  to  flocks  of  the  Labdudi. 

2^  A.   178-81  =  281-84. 

^  Samuna  occurs  also  in  Ashur  bani  pal,  Rm.  Cyl.,  V.  55  ;  Sennacherib, 
Prism,  V.  33.  Maspero,  Empires,  256  n.  2^  places  it  near  Zirzirtepe, 
Billerbeck,  Suleimania,   118,  near  Mendeli. 

^  Bab  duri  is  placed  by  both  Maspero,  /.  c,  and  Billerbeck,  op.  cit., 
117,  at  Hussenieh  on  the  Aft  ab. 


134  WESTERN    ASIA   IN    THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

were  outposts  which  Shutur  nahundi  had  fortified  against 
latburu,  as  one  of  the  versions  would  have  us  believe,-*  or 
whether  these  were  towns  of  latburu  and  it  was  the  towns 
of  Ahilimmu  and  Pillutu^^  that  were  Elamitish,  as  the  other 
asserts,^®  we  cannot  pretend  to  know.  The  commanders  of 
these  cities,  Sadunu  and  Sinlishshibu,-"  were  forced  to  sur- 
render, together  with  nearly  twenty  thousand  soldiers,  over 
a  third  of  whom  were  Elamitish.  In  addition,  there  was 
taken  much  booty  of  wagons,  horses,  mules,  asses,  and 
camels.  Samuna  was  rebuilt  and  named  Bel  ikisha.  While 
still  in  camp  here,  tribute  was  received  from  a  number  of 
latburu  chiefs  whose  tribes^^  were  settled  on  the  banks  of  the 
Naditu.2®  The  operations  came  to  an  end  with  the  conquest 
of  certain  important  towns  in  Rashi,^^  Til  Humba,  Dunni 
Shamash,  Bube,  and  Hamanu.^^    The  inhabitants  retired  to 

''  A.  278. 

^Andreas,  art.  Alexandreia,  13,  Pauly-Wissowa,  Real  Encyl.,  identi- 
fies Pillutu  with  the  Pagum  Pellaeum  of  Plin.,  VI.  138.  Billerbeck, 
op.  cit.,  118,  places  it  at  Desht  i  Gulam,  Maspero,  /.  c,  at  Tepe 
Ghulamen. 

»A.  283  f. 

^  Or  perhaps  Singamshibu,  as  Winckler,  ad  loc. 

^  These  were  Mushezibu,  Natnu,  Ailunu,  Daizzanu  of  the  land  of 
Lahiru,  Airimmu,  the  komarch  of  Sulaia.  Winckler  for  this  last  reads 
Bel  Mahazu  as  a  proper  name  since  C.  has  VI  nasikate  but  II.  26  which 
he  seems  not  to  have  used  reads  only  V  and  this  is  preferable.  Lahiru 
or  Lahirimmu  is  placed  by  Billerbeck,  /.  c,  in  a  side  valley  of  the  Aft 
ab;  by  Maspero,  /.  c,  at  Jughai  ben  Ruan.  The  duplicate  283-84  has 
the  city  Lahira  of  the  land  of  ladibiru,  Sulaia,  Zu(?)-?-muk,  Samu'na, 
Babduri,  Lahirimmu,  Pillutu. 

^  The  Naditu  is  the  Aft  ab  according  to  Maspero,  /.  c,  and  Biller- 
beck, op.  cit.,  116.  According  to  the  latter,  here  was  the  fort  of  Nabu 
damiq   ilani   of  A.    368.       Cf.   the   city   Naditu   of    Sennacherib,   Prism, 

IV.  59. 

^  Rashi  is  the  upper  Pusht  i  Kuh  region,  according  to  Maspero, 
Empires,  I.  c,  and  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  120.  The  latter  believes  the 
Rashi  expedition  to  be  separate. 

^^  Til  Humba  evidently  has  the  name  of  the  old  Elamitish  god 
Humba.       It   is   Gilan,    according   to    Billerbeck,    op.    cit.,    124.       Dunni 


ELAMITISH    WARS    AND    CONQUEST   OF    BABYLON  I  35 

Bit  Imbi,^-  which  does  not  seem  to  have  been  taken,  while 
Shutur  nahundi,  the  instigator  of  all  this  resistance,  retired 
to  the  mountains.^^  That  he  should  have  been  engaged  here 
while  the  Assyrians  further  south  were  striving  to  find  a 
road  to  his  capital  shows  how  safe  he  felt  that  to  be  behind 
its  mountain  walls.  How  thorough  all  this  conquest  was 
is  shown  by  the  fact  that  Sargon's  own  son,  Sennacherib, 
informs  us  that  some  of  it  was  already  lost  in  the  days 
of  his  father.^* 

While  these  two  divisions  had  been  conquering  the  coun- 
try east  of  the  Tigris  and  thus  driving  a  wedge  between 
Elam  and  Babylonia,  Sargon,  with  the  main  army,  was  mov- 
ing directly  upon  Babylon.  Here,  for  twelve  years,^^  Mero- 
dach  Baladan  had  held  his  own.  Even  if  not  a  native  patriot, 
as  the  earlier  scholars  assumed,^*'  he  was  still  looked  upon  as 

Shamash  he  places,  /,  c,  at  Desht  i  Kasimban,  Bube  on  the  Kanischend 
Rud.  cf.  Sennacherib,  Prism,  IV.  51,  and  Hamanu  at  the  pass  from 
Kifraur  valley. 

^^Maspero,  /.  c,  and  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  122  f.,  place  Bit  Imbi  in 
Desht  i  Gaur,  a  very  fertile  region  and  a  road  center.  It  was  a  royal 
city,   Sennacherib,  Prism,  IV.   54;   Ashur  bani  pal,  Rm.  Cyl.,   IV.   124. 

^A.  28£  fF.  Here  should  be  placed  the  names  of  D.  18  if.,  and  P. 
IV.  71  ff.,  cf.  Billerbeck,  Mitth.  Vorderasiat.  Gesellsch.,  1898,  2,  35  ff. — 
Here  we  may  place  K.  7299  =  H.  799  from  Shamash  bel  ugur,  eponym 
in  710  where  we  are  told  that  the  king  of  Elam  went  on  the  11 
Tammuz  to  Bit  Bunaki  and  on  the  13  to  land  of  U.  On  the  edge  is  a 
reference  to  Balasu  (Belysis). 

^*  Prism  IV.  43  if.  The  towns  which  are  distinctly  said  to  have  been 
taken  from  the  Assyrian  territory  are  Bit  Ha'iri  and  Raga.  But  other 
towns  which  Sargon  claims  to  have  conquered,  such  as  Bube,  Dunni 
Shamash,  Bit  Imbia,  Til  Humbi,  are  again  taken  as  foreign  places. 
Again,  at  the  battle  of  Halulu,  Sennacherib  is  opposed  by  many  of  these 
conquered  tribes  such  as  Hindaru,  Rapiqu,  Ru'a,  Gambulu,  Puqudu, 
Bit  Amukkana,  Samuna,  Sulai,  etc.      Prism,  V.  30  fF. 

«»A.  228;  Bah.  Chron.,  II.  i. 

^  Cf.  n.  2,  For  an  ancient  appreciation  of  the  fact  that  the 
Chaldaeans  were  not  the  same  as  the  Babylonians,  see  Strabo,  XVI.  i.  6. 


136  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

a  foreign  deliverer  by  a  large  anti-Assyrian  party,  whose 
property  had  been  confiscated  and  who  had  been  imprisoned 
during  the  last  period  of  foreign  rule.^^  The  majority  of 
our  documents  come  from  the  priestly  class,  who  would  nat- 
urally favor  so  pious  a  king  as  Sargon,  but  their  version 
should  not  make  us  forget  that  there  must  have  been  a  large 
military  class  and  a  still  larger  commercial  one  which  was 
the  natural  enemy  of  Assyria. 

In  his  inscriptions  Sargon  tells  us  that  the  Chaldaean 
usurper  imprisoned  the  leading  men  of  the  land,  although 
they  had  committed  no  crime,  and  confiscated  their  prop- 
erty.*® No  doubt  this  is  all  true  enough.  But  when  Mero- 
dach  Baladan  did  all  this  he  was,  only  inflicting  on  the  pro- 
Assyrian  party  severities  which  they  themselves  had  em- 
ployed on  their  rivals  of  the  other  party.  In  the  royal 
charter  granting  lands  to  Bel  ahe  erba,^®  we  are  told  of  lands 
torn  from  their  rightful  owners,  of  forgotten  boundaries 
and  destroyed  boundary  stones,  and  all  this  took  place  in 
the  days  when  the  Assyrian  enemy  devastated  the  land  and 
"  there  was  no  king  "  in  Babylon.  Peaceable  people  must 
indeed  have  suflfered  when  the  land  was  torn  between  the 
two  factions,  and  could  have  had  as  little  love  for  one  as  the 
other. 

While,  therefore,  the  accusations  of  the  two  enemies 
throw  light  on  the  conduct  of  each  other,  Sargon  is  deliber- 
ately telling  an  untruth,  when  he  states  that  Merodach  Bala- 
dan did  not  respect  the  gods,  but  removed  them  and  allowed 
their  sacrifices  to  fall  into  neglect.  If  the  Babylonian  priest- 
hood remained  hostile  to  the  Chaldaean,  it  was  from  no  lack 

^^  See  the  discussion  of  the  boundary  charter  under  Sources,  chap. 
I.  n.  56. 

'^A.   359    ^. 
''  Cf.  n.  37. 


ELAMITISH    WARS   AND    CONQUEST   OF    BABYLON  1 37 

of  effort  on  his  part  to  win  them  over.  Like  all  other  for- 
eign conquerors  of  Babylon,  he  became  a  votary  of  the  gods 
of  the  land.  Thus,  in  the  above-mentioned  inscription,  we 
have  the  same  glorification  of  Marduk,  Nabu  and  Ea,  the 
same  recognition  of  dependence  on  them,  as  we  meet  in  those 
of  the  native  rulers.  Nor  was  this  homage  confined  to  words 
alone.  He  adorned  and  rebuilt  the  ancient  temples,  one  of 
which  was  that  of  Nana  at  Uruk,*^  and  provided  for  their 
maintenance  and  their  revenues.^^  Special  attention,  too, 
was  given  to  the  ancient  and  revered  cities  of  Sippar,  Nip- 
pur, and  Babylon.*^  It  is  therefore  probable  that  the  mass 
of  the  people  were  well  enough  content  with  his  rule.  Other- 
wise, it  is  difficult  to  understand  why  he  so  easily  won  back 
Babylon  so  soon  after  Sargon  died. 

The  settlement  of  Merodach  Baladan  at  the  gates  of  As- 
syria was  a  grave  danger,  for  it  was  a  constant  incitement 
to  the  other  subject  states  to  follow  the  example  of  a  suc- 
cessful revolt.  In  addition,  there  were  sentimental  reasons 
which  would  induce  any  Assyrian  ruler,  much  more  one  so 
religious  and  so  interested  in  antiquity  as  Sargon,  to  attempt 
the  conquest.  This  constant  desire  to  conquer  the  seemingly 
eternal  city  of  Babylon,  "  seize  the  hands  of  Bel,"  and  thus 
become  the  vice  gerent  of  Marduk  on  earth,  has  been  well 
compared  with  the  equally  constant  desire  of  the  Germanic 
kings  to  be  crowned  emperor  at  Ronie.*^  In  many  ways  the 
attitude  of  respectful  mastership  assumed  by  Rome  in  her 
dealings  with  Greece  would  be  a  comparison  more  to  the 
point.    But  neither  is  close  enough.    We  have  here  no  for- 

*"  Brick  I.  R.  5.  XVII  in  the  pavement  at  the  base  of  the  Bowarieh 
mound  at  Warka.  Transliterated  and  translated  by  Winckler,  Zeitschr. 
f.  Assyr.,  1892,  184. 

"  Boundary  Stone,  II.  4  ff. 

*^Ib.  II.  8  ff.;  III.  10  ff. 

*' Winckler,  Sargon,  XXXIII. 


138  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

eign  countries  separated  as  much  by  barriers  of  speech  and 
custom  as  by  sea  or  mountain.  In  its  origin  Assyria  seems 
to  have  been  a  Babylonian  colony.  In  language  there  was 
less  difference  than  between  Athens  and  Sparta.  The  only 
natural  boundary  was  the  line  of  the  alluvium,  and  that 
was  no  barrier.  On  the  other  hand,  the  two  great  navigable 
rivers,  the  numberless  canals,  the  roads  with  easy  grades,  all 
brought  the  two  countries  into  close  relations  with  each 
other.  The  result  was  what  might  have  been  expected.  To 
the  end  Assyria  was  like  Rome,  the  faithful  copyist  of  Baby- 
lonia in  most  that  did  not  relate  to  war  or  government.  In 
art,  in  literature,  in  law,  even  in  the  trivial  details  of  every- 
day life,  Assyria  leaned  upon  Babylon.  Above  all,  this  was 
true  of  religion,  although  Assyria  did  indeed  have  a  national 
Ashur  cult.  But  even  this  could  not  prevent  the  older  gods 
of  the  south  from  usurping  to  a  considerable  degree  his 
place.  The  earlier  Assyrian  kings  could  ascribe  victory  to 
Ashur.  The  later  ones  did  not  feel  their  world  empire  sure 
until  Bel  Marduk  of  Babylon  had  allowed  them  to  seize  his 
hands  in  the  "  city  of  the  lord  of  gods."  ** 

Sargon  seems  to  have  collected  his  troops  at  Ashur,  which 
he  perhaps  inhabited  at  this  time.  He  then  would  have 
moved  down  the  west  bank  of  the  Tigris  and  crossed  the 
Euphrates,  probably  at  Falujah,  where  the  last  hills  retreat 
from  the  river.*^  From  here  he  entered  the  country  of  Bit 
**D.  124. 

"  It  is  possible  that  this  is  the  place  where  Trajan  crossed.  Phalga 
is  mentioned  by  Arrian,  Parthica,  X  =  Frag.  7,  Steph.  Byz.  s.  v.  It 
is  there  observed  that  the  word  means  middle  which  would  agree  with 
Falujeh  from  root  f  1  j.  The  following  fragments  are  in  Babylonia. 
In  fact,  frag.  8,  from  the  same  book  X,  is  Choke  near  Seleucia  and  the 
Tigris.  The  preceding  fragments  seem  to  point  to  a  line  like  that 
followed  by  Sargon,  along  the  Tigris,  e.  g.,  frag.  6,  from  Book  IX, 
is  Libanai,  a  city  of  (As)syria  near  Hatra.  A  pontoon  bridge  was  made 
across  the  Tigris  at  the  Carduchian  mountains,  Die  Cassius,  LXVIII. 


ELAMITISH    WARS    AND    CONQUEST   OF    BABYLON         1 39 

Dakkuri,*^  not  perhaps  without  a  battle,  where  he  found  the 
ruined  fort  of  Dur  Ladina,  about  where  we  now  have  the 
sacred  city  of  Kerbela.  As  this  was  a  good  outpost  against 
Babylon,  it  was  rebuilt  and  garrisoned.  The  position  of 
Merodach  Baladan  had  now  become  untenable.  On  the 
west,  Dur  Ladina,  on  the  north  Kutha^^  were  in  the  hands 
of  the  Assyrians,  and  each  was  but  a  few  miles  from  Baby- 
lon.    On  the  east  the  whole  of  the  Elamitish  foothills  had 

26.  2,  and  Arbela  passed,  ib.  4.  What  other  evidence  we  have  seems 
to  indicate  that  the  march  was,  as  might  be  expected,  along  the  usual 
route  across  Mesopotamia  close  to  the  mountains  and  thence  down  the 
Tigris.  The  very  unusual  route  straight  down  the  Euphrates  has  only 
one  point  in  its  favor  and  many  against,  but  this  one  point  is  difficult 
to  get  rid  of.  Phalga  is  said  to  be  half  way  between  Seleucia  and 
Pieria  and  to  be  in  Mesopotamia ;  and  this  statement  is  confirmed  by  the 
detailed  itinerary  in  Isidore  of  Charax,  where  Phalga  or  Phaliga  oc- 
cupies a  position  corresponding  to  the  later  Circesium.  Since  the 
position  of  a  Phalga  is  thus  fixed,  we  must  either,  on  the  strength  of 
this  one  quotation  and  against  natural  probability  and  the  general  tenor 
-of  the  other  pertinent  passages,  make  the  troops  go  by  the  Euphrates 
route  direct,  or  we  must  assume  a  confusion,  either  in  the  mind  of 
Arrian  or  of  Stephen,  between  the  Babylonian  Falujah  and  the  better 
known  town  of  the  same  name  near  the  Roman  frontier.  In  the 
condition  of  our  sources,  scanty  and  mutilated  as  they  are,  it  is  im- 
possible to  come  to  a  definite  conclusion,  but  I   incline  to  the  second. 

"  Bit  Dakkuri  is  placed  by  Winckler,  map,  and  Billerbeck,  map, 
west  of  the  Euphrates  and  of  Babylon.  Bab.  Chron.,  II.  2,  seems  to 
place  here  a  regular  battle.  — Here  also  seems  to  belong  K.  ii4i=:H. 
542  =  IV.  R.  46.  I  (53.  i).  Information  is  sent  the  king  that  Bit 
Dakkuri  has  sent  to  make  common  cause  with  Merodach  Baladan.  The 
forces  of  Bit  Dakkuri  now  seem  to  be  at  Bit  Qa.  It  is  hoped  they 
will  proceed  to  Bab  Bit  Qa.  The  king  sent  a  message  to  the  governor 
Ana  Nabu  takkalla.  Reference  is  made  to  the  son  of  lashunu  with 
his  clan  who  were  settled  somewhere.  Daini  is  also  mentioned.  The 
land  of  Rabiti  has  been  brought  back  and  the  strongholds  have  been 
occupied. 

"  Assyrian  control  of  Kutha  seems  proved  by  the  absence  of  any 
mention  of  its  capture  by  Sargon.  This  seems  to  be  confirmed  by 
Rm.  2,  97  where  under  719  we  have  the  building  of  a  Nergal  temple, 
seemingly  the  great  one  at  that  place. 


140  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

fallen  into  their  hands,  and  a  part  of  their  troops  was  already 
working  their  way  through  the  swamps  toward  Dur  lakin 
and  threatening  his  rear. 

He  was  accordingly  forced  to  retreat.  At  first  he  with- 
drew to  latbur  along  the  Tigris.*^  From  here  he  sent  a 
"  tribute,"  as  the  Assyrian  writer  sarcastically  calls  his 
presents  to  Shutur  nahundi,  begging  for  Elamitish  aid. 
The  Assyrian  insinuates  that  Shutur  nahundi  did  not  come, 
because  he  did  not  wish  to,  and  portrays  with  deep  feeling 

^'  Here  again,  equally  with  its  connection  with  the  Uknu  swamps, 
we  see  that  latbur  is  much  more  to  the  south  than  is  usually  assumed. 
If  we  locate  latbur  as  I  do,  it  would  be  perfectly  natural  for  Merodach 
Baladan  to  take  the  direct  road  east  to  Susa  and  then,  finding  this  road 
blocked  by  the  Assyrian  advance,  to  fall  back  southeast  to  Dur  lakin. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  he  fled  far  to  the  north- 
east and  then  retraced  his  steps  through  country  already  conquered  by 
Sargon.  Billerbeck,  Suleimania,  114  n.,  believes  that  Merodach  Baladan 
fled  to  latbur  early  in  the  year  and  then  returned  to  Babylon.  This 
is  not  only  unsupported  by  any  direct  evidence,  but,  as  it  seems  to  me, 
is  difficult  to  understand  in  the  light  of  the  topography  and  of  the 
statements  of  the  sources  themselves.  It  is  the  news  of  these  earlier 
expeditions  of  Sargon,  threatening  his  flank  and  even  his  rear,  which 
were,  as  we  are  expressly  told  in  A.  288  if.,  the  cause  of  his  retreat 
to  latbur.  But  then  all  the  region  about  Dur  Athara  and  to  the  north 
was  in  the  hands  of  Sargon  and  so  retreat  to  or  through  these  was 
impossible.  A.  291  ff.  shows  what  he  was  trying  to  do,  to  get  in  touch 
with  Elam  and  to  do  this  he  would  naturally  try  the  direct  road  to 
Susa.  When  he  found  this  road  blocked  by  Dur  Athara  which  was  now 
in  Assyrian  hands,  he  naturally  retreated.  This  was  first  to  Iqbi  Bel 
and  then  to  Dur  lakin.  Between  the  two  parts  of  the  retreat,  the 
Assyrian  scribes  put  the  entrance  of  Sargon  into  Babylon  and  I  do  not 
see  why  this  should  not  be  accepted.  But  if  so,  then  the  retreat  to 
Iqbi  Bel  is  part  of  the  retreat  to  Dur  lakin.  At  any  rate,  I  do  not  see 
how  he  could  have  gone  back  to  Babylon.  It  seems  to  me  that  my 
reconstruction  of  the  military  operations  is  clear,  I  cannot  under- 
stand the  military  reasons  which  compelled  these  operations  according 
to  Billerbeck's  theory.  Bah.  Chron.,  II.  3,  says  that  Merodach  Baladan 
fled  to  Elam  and  puts  it  under  710.  The  whole  general  condition  seems 
to  prove  that  either  the  Bah.  Chron.  is  mistaken  or,  more  probably, 
that  ana  means  "  towards  "  in  this  place. 


ELAMITISH    WARS    AND    CONQUEST   OF    BABYLON         I4I 

the  scene  which  took  place  when  Merodach  Baladan  learned 
the  news,  how  he  threw  himself  on  the  ground,  tore  his 
clothes,  and  filled  the  air  with  his  loud  lamentations.  As  we 
have  already  seen,  the  Elamite  king  was  busy  in  the  north 
at  this  time  and  perhaps  did  not  know  of  the  plight  of  his 
ally.  Besides,  he  had  all  the  fighting  he  needed  in  this  part 
of  the  field. 

As  Merodach  Baladan  was  unable  by  himself  to  break 
through  to  Elam  and  as  Shutur  nahundi  could  not  or  would 
not  come  to  his  aid,  he  was  forced  to  fall  back  along  the 
Tigris  to  Iqbi  Bel,  perhaps  the  present  Amara.*^ 

With  the  retreat  of  Merodach  Baladan,  Babylon  opened 
its  gates.  In  long  procession,  the  citizens  of  Babylon  and 
Borsippa,  magistrates,  trade  guilds,  artisans,  carried  to  Sar- 
gon,  as  he  lay  encamped  at  Dur  hadina,  the  greeting  of  the 
great  gods,  Bel  Marduk  and  Zarpanit,  Nabu  and  Tashmit. 
The  envoys  were  received  graciously  by  the  pious  monarch, 
who  showed  by  his  sacrifices  his  respect  for  the  old  order  of 
things.*^^  It  was  now  late  in  the  year,  and  New  Year's  Day 
was  approaching.  Sargon  resolved  to  "  seize  the  hands  of 
Bel  "  himself  and  thus  assume  personal  rule  over  Babylon. 

**Iqbi  Bel  seems  to  have  been  on  the  banks  of  the  Tigris,  above 
Dur  lakin.  If  Merodach  Baladan  actually  advanced  as  far  as  Dur 
Athara  (Serboa  Kherib),  he  would  naturally  fall  back  first  to  'Amara 
at  the  junction  of  the  Tib  and  the  Tigris. — A.  287  ff.;  D.  121  fF. 

K.  7426  =:  H.  30  is  from  Arad  Ea,  evidently  not  the  well-known 
physician  who  lived  later,  Johnston,  Jour.  Amer.  Orient.  Soc,  1897, 
I,  160.  Reference  is  made  to  Merodach  Baladan  and  there  is  a  direct 
address  to  Sargon  by  name.  Unfortunately,  it  is  too  mutilated  to 
be  translated. 

It  would  seem  as  if  the  Chaldaean  Belibni  who  was  later  made  king 
of  Babylon  by  Sennacherib  was  at  this  time  carried  to  Assyria  to  be 
educated  at  Sargon's  court,  cf.  Bellino  CyL,  13. 

^A.  296  ff.  In  three  years  Sargon  gave  over  150  talents  of  gold 
and  1600  of  silver  besides  much  bronze,  iron,  stone,  wood,  and  clothing 
to  the  Babylonian  gods,  D.  140  if. 


142  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

For  the  approaching  ceremony  the  old  canal  of  Borsippa 
was  restored  in  order  that  it  might  be  used  as  the  festival 
street  along  which  Nabu  might  pass  to  greet  Marduk  on  this 
auspicious  day. 

Sargon  now  went  into  winter  quarters  at  Babylon  where 
the  tribute  of  some  of  the  Arimi,  or  Aramaeans,  of  the  Bit 
Amukani,  and  of  Bit  Dakkuri,  was  received.  At  the  same 
time  the  conquest  of  North  Babylonia  was  completed  by  the 
subjugation  of  the  Hamarana,  one  of  the  "helper"  tribes 
of  Merodach  Baladan.  They  had  retreated  across  the  Eu- 
phrates before  the  Assyrian  advance  and  established  them- 
selves in  Sippar.  The  Babylonians  attempted  to  drive  them 
out,  but  failed.  An  Assyrian  force  was  detached  from  the 
main  body  and  sent  under  a  governor  against  them.  A  wall 
of  circumvallation  was  thrown  around  Sippar  and  the 
Hamarana  were  forced  to  surrender.'*^ 

The  great  prize  was  now  Sargon's.  On  New  Year's  Day 
he  "  seized  the  hands  of  Bel "  and  became  king  of  Babylon 
with  all  due  pomp  and  ceremony.^-  A  month  was  still 
needed  for  the  settlement  of  Babylon,  and  then,  in  the  month 
of  May,  he  set  out  for  his  final  attack  on  Merodach  Bala- 
dan.   On  his  advance,  the  Chaldaean  fell  back  to  Dur  lakin^^ 

"  A.  301  ff. — Perhaps  here  belongs  K.  507  =  H.  88  =  Delitzsch, 
Beitr.  zur  Assyr.,  II.  z^  if.j  a  letter  written  by  Tab  gil  esharra  from 
Ashur  to  the  king  who  is  elsewhere,  seemingly  further  north.  The 
cause  of  its  sending  is  to  excuse  Nabu  bel  shumate  the  qepu  of  Birat 
who  could  not  visit  the  king  at  the  appointed  time  because  he  must, 
with  his  forces,  drive  back  the  Uppai  who  have  plundered  Sippar.  Is 
it  possible  that  this  indicates  that  Sargon  was  not  with  any  of  the 
armies  attacking  Babylon  ? 

Many  of  these  conquests  were  not  permanent  as  Sennacherib  was 
compelled  to  reconquer  them,  Prism,  V.  51   fF. 

"A.  309  ff.  Tiele  takes  this  to  be  in  710,  since  the  Annals  places 
it  under  year  XII,  Gesch.,  276,  but  this  is  only  the  usual  anticipation. 

^^  Andreas,  art.  Alexandreia,  13,  Pauly-Wissowa,  Real  Encykl.,  identi- 
fies Dur  lakin  with  the  urhs  regia  D urine  of  Plin.,  H.  N.,  VI  138,  and 


ELAMITISH    WARS   AND    CONQUEST   OF    BABYLON         1 43 

in  the  marshes  of  the  Mar  Marrati,^*  the  swamps  at  the  head 
of  the  Persian  Gulf.  Here  he  prepared  to  make  his  last 
stand.  The  nomad  troops  were  collected,  the  city  fortified, 
and  a  canal  from  the  Euphrates  brought  around  the  place, 
the  bridges  destroyed,  and  the  whole  country  made  a  morass 
by  the  breaking  down  of  the  dams.  Outside  the  walls, 
earthworks  were  thrown  up  and  troops  posted  in  them. 

"  Like  eagles  "  Sargon's  troops  crossed  the  streams  and 
advanced  to  the  attack.  The  nomads  were  forced  back  and 
a  hand-to-hand  conflict  took  place  before  the  walls.  Mero- 
dach  Baladan  was  wounded  in  the  arm  and  obliged  to  take 
refuge  within  the  city.  His  troops,  nevertheless,  Puqudu, 
Marsamai,  Sute,^^  resisted  to  the  last  and  were  slaughtered 
before  the  gate.  Rich  booty  was  taken,  including  the  king's 
furniture  and  plate,^^  in  addition  to  captives  and  the  various 
domestic  animals.  For  three  days  the  city  was  given  over 
to  plunder.  Then  it  was  burned,  its  towers  thrown  down, 
its  very  foundations  torn  up,  and  the  place  given  over  to 
utter  ruin. 

Yet  the  real  object  of  the  expedition  was  not  accomplished. 
Merodach  Baladan  escaped,  as  one  of  the  versions  is  forced 
to  admit.     Other  versions,  indeed,  give  the  history  as  it 

also  with  the  Aginis,  s.  v.,  of  Strabo,  XV.  3.  5.  The  place  must  be 
somewhere  near  Qorneh,  quite  probably  at  the  small  nearby  hill  of 
Jebel  Beni  Mangur,  Billerbeck,  Mitth.  Vorderasiat.  Gesell,  1898,  2,  47. 
Dieulafoy,  Suse,  6^,  suggests  Durak  Gadim,  a  tumulus  northeast  of 
Mohammereh.  The  identity  of  name  is  remarkable,  but  I  cannot 
satisfy  myself  that  Dur  lakin  lay  so  far  south  or  east.  If  it  actually 
did,  there  must  be  some  changes  in  our  generally  accepted  topography. 

^  According  to  Andreas,  op.  cit.,  art.  Aginis,  this  is  the  Melitene  of 
Ptol.  VI.  3.  3. 

^  Sute  was  a  common  word  for  nomad,  cf .  W.  M.  Miiller,  Asien,  20,  46 ; 
Winckler,  Forsch.,  II.  254,  reads  Shuth  in  Ezek.  23^^  and  compares  the 
Sittakenoi  of  Arr.  Anab.  III.  8.  5. 

^  In  one  version,  they  are  nearly  all  gold,  in  the  other  nearly  all 
silver.      What  was  the  original  material? 


144  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

should  have  been,  with  Merodach  Baladan  as  a  captive  or  as 
a  pardoned  rebel  with  his  tribute  paid  and  his  fortresses  dis- 
mantled, but  the  course  of  later  events  proves  that  he  did 
indeed  escape.  He  remained  safe  in  the  marshes  of  the 
extreme  south  until  Sargon  died,  when  once  more,  for  a 
short  time,  he  held  the  throne  of  Babylonia.*^^ 

The  remainder  of  the  year  was  taken  up  with  the  settle- 
ment of  affairs  in  South  Babylonia.  The  political  prisoners 
from  Babylon,  Sippar,  Nippur,  and  Borsippa,  were  freed 
from  their  confinement  at  Dur  lakin  and  restored  to  their 
homes  and  lands.  Religion  once  more  became  supreme. 
The  gods  were  restored  to  the  cities  and  new  buildings 
erected.  The  whole  of  the  region  along  the  Elamitish  bor- 
der, Dur  lakin  included,  was  settled  by  captives  from  Qum- 
muh,  hardly  a  wise  proceeding  for  the  change  from  the  cold 
bracing  highlands  along  the  upper  Euphrates  to  the  hot, 
fever-laden  swamps  of  this  region  must  have  soon  proved 
fatal  to  the  majority  of  them.  A  strong  fort  was  built  against 
Elam  at  Sagbat  by  Nabu  damiq  ilani,  who  seems  to  be  the 
governor  of  Gambulu  mentioned  immediately  after.  The 
control  of  this  frontier  was  confided  to  him  and  to  the  gov- 
ernor of  Babylon.^^ 

"A.  317  if.;  D.  126  ff.;  Bah.  Chron.,  II.  6;  Rm.  2,  97. 

•"A  Nabu  damiq  alani  is  given  by  Johns,  Deeds,  III.  119,  but  is 
hardly  this  person.  Sagbat  is  clearly  not  the  Bit  Sagbat  of  A.  69. 
Billerbeck,  Suleimania,  97,  116,  places  it  at  Kala  Janshur,  at  the  Aft 
ab  pass  to  the  east  of  Dur  ilu.  Billerbeck,  op.  cit.,  96,  speaks  "  von 
der  Griindung  einer  neuen  Stadt  Nabu  damiq  ilani  *ina(mhz)  Sagbad." 
I  do  not  see  how  he  gets  this.  The  Nabu  damiq  ilani  has  the  sign 
of  the  person  before  it.  It  would  therefore  be  possible  to  take  it  as 
Sagbat  of  the  man  Nabu  damiq  ilani  and  compare  the  Dur  Bel  Harran 
Bel  UQur  which  that  official  founded,  see  Scheil,  Rec.  de  Trav.,  1894 
(XVI),  176  if.  The  rarity  of  such  an  action  and  the  unlikelihood  of  a 
ruler  publishing  such  an  act  of  almost  actual  usurpation  of  sovereign 
power,  especially  when  he  never  names  his  governors  at  all,  makes 
this  very  unlikely.      But  if  this  will  not  go,   then   there   seems   to   be 


ELAMITISH    WARS    AND    CONQUEST   OF    BABYLON  1 45 

At  almost  the  same  time  Sargon's  vanity  was  flattered  by 
"  tribute "  from  two  distant  islands  at  the  two  extreme 
corners  of  the  known  world.  We  have  already  seen  the 
reason  for  his  relations  with  Cyprus.  What  led  Uperi,  king 
of  Tilmun,  a  half  mythical  island  lying  a  sixty  hours'  jour- 
ney down  the  gulf,  "  like  a  fish  in  the  sea,"  to  open  relations 
with  Sargon  is  not  so  clear.  Probably  it  was  for  commercial 
reasons.  If  Tilmun  was  indeed  the  present  Bahrein,  we  may 
perhaps  see  in  it  a  wish  to  secure  a  market  for  the  pearls 
which  have  made  the  island  so  famous  in  modern  times.^^ 

Sargon  remained  for  some  time  in  Babylonia,  receiving 
the  submission  of  the  natives  and  attempting  to  put  affairs 
in  order.^^  In  707  all  seemed  to  be  quiet,  or  at  least  matters 
were  becoming  more  serious  to  the  north.  The  king  re- 
turned to  Assyria,  after  having  brought  back  the  gods  of  the 

only  one  other  possibility  and  that  is  to  translate  eli  migir  Elamtu  ina 
Sagbat  Nabu  damiq  Hani  ana  shuprus  shapa  Elami  usharkis  birtu  ex- 
actly as  Winckler  does,  "  gegen  das  gebiet  van  Elam  Hess  ich  Nabu 
damqu  ilani  in  Sagbat,  um  die  Elamiter  aufzuhalten,  eine  festung  bauen." 
For  this  sense  of  usharkis,  see  Muss  Arnolt,  s.  v.,  rakasu.  I  there- 
fore do  not  see  how  I  can  take  it  otherwise  than  in  the  text. 

°*A.  359  ff.\  D.  134  ff.;  144  Z^.— This  Tilmun  is  no  doubt  tne  Tylos 
of  Arr,  Anab.,  VII.  20.  12;  Artemidorus,  in  Steph.  Byz.,  s.  v.;  Ptol. 
VI.  7.  47;  Pliny,  H.  N.,  VI.  28.  148.  The  last  speaks  of  its  pearl 
fisheries.  It  is  now  the  island  of  Bahrein  where  pearl  fisheries  are 
still  carried  on,  cf.  S.  M.  Zwemer,  Arabia  [1900],  97  ff.  For  dis- 
cussion, cf.  Oppert,  Journal  Asiatique,  1880,  I.  90  ff.;  H.  Rawlinson, 
Jour.  Roy.  Asiat.  Soc,  1880,  201  ff.  For  the  ancient  ruins  still  there, 
see  Durand,  Jour.  Roy.  Asiat.  Soc,   1880,   189   ff. 

**  H.  196,  e.  g.,  is  a  letter  from  Sennacherib  in  Kalhu  to  his  father 
Sargon  who  seems  still  to  be  in  Babylon.  Under  708,  the  Bab.  Chron., 
has  ina,  "  in,"  mati,  "  land,"  is  generally  supplied.  A  statement  that 
there  was  no  war  seems  rather  out  of  place  in  a  Babylonian  chronicle 
which  does  not  go  by  years,  and  is  not  parallel  elsewhere.  I  should 
compare  Rm.  2,  97,  under  710,  and  read  ina  Kesh  (ki),  "in  Kesh,"  or 
ina  Babili,  "  in  Babylon."  The  second  part  of  708  in  Rm.  2,  97,  as 
I  now  think,  (amel)-pehu  shakin,  "  a  governor  appointed,"  would  rather 
refer  to  Babylon  than  to  Qummuh. 
10 


146  WESTERN    ASIA   IN    THE   DAYS   OF   SARGON 

sea  lands  to  their  ancestral  seats,  taking  with  him  a  body  of 
captives  to  be  settled  there.^^  But  these  northern  troubles 
seem  once  more  to  have  aroused  the  south,  and  the  settlers 
placed  in  Dur  lakin  were  driven  out  in  706.^^  In  705  we 
have  the  news  of  a  capture  of  Dur  lakin.     By  this  time 

•"  II.  R.  69  reads  "  On  the  22  of  Tashrit,  the  gods  of  Dur  Sharrukin  " 
and  this  has  generally,  with  Tiele,  Gesch.,  281,  been  taken  to  refer 
to  a  great  festival  procession  which  took  place  when  the  gods  entered 
the  new  city.  But  Bah.  Chron.,  II.  8,  under  year  XV,  on  the  same 
day  of  the  same  month  says  that  the  gods  of  the  sealands  to  their 
places  came  back.  I  do  not  quite  see  how  Dur  Sharrukin  came  to 
take  the  place  of  (mat)  tamdim,  but  the  agreement  of  date  and  of  so 
many  signs  makes  me  feel  sure  that  the  two  refer  to  the  same  fact. 
This  literal  agreement  of  signs  seems  to  point  to  some  connection  be- 
tween the  two  documents.  The  Chronicle  continues  "  BAD.MESh 
were  established  in  Assyria."  Winckler,  Keilinschr.  Bibl.,  ad  he, 
refuses  a  translation,  Barta,  in  Harper,  Literature,  201,  reads  dame, 
"  bloods,"  and  so  makes  it  refer  to  sacrifices  made  in  Assyria.  I  am 
now  a  little  inclined  to  compare  Briinnow,  1525,  nisu,  "remove,"  per- 
haps nisute,  "  those  who  were  removed,  t.  e.,  the  captives,  were  settled 
in  Assyria."  II.  R.  69  also  reads  under  707  issuhra  ga  rah  (pi) 
shal-lu.  Schrader,  Keilinschr.  Bihl.,  ad  loc,  considers  ga  rah  (pi) 
an  easy  mistake  for  ekallati,  "  palaces."  But  then  we  do  not  know 
what  to  do  with  the  shal-lu.  Schrader  considers  them  to  be  an  error 
for  the  longer  form  of  u  which  they  do  closely  resemble.  But  it  is 
more  natural  to  supply  shal-lu-Ue,  "captive."  This  then  throws 
doubt  on  the  "  houses."  An  easy  correction  for  ga  rah  (pi)  is  Hani 
rahute,  "  the  great  gods."  The  line  is  then  to  be  read  with  tEe  one 
succeeding.  "  He  returned  the  great  gods  who  were  capti[ve.  Cn 
the  XXII  of  Tashrit  the  gods  of  (the  sea  land)  [to  their  places  came 
back]."  Rm.  2,  97,  under  707  states  that  the  king  returned  from 
Babylon,  which  agrees  with  the  second  part  of  Bah.  Chron. 

•*  Rm.  2,  97,  under  706  read  sha  (al)  Dur  lakin  nag  a.  Winckler 
reads  "von  D.  wurde  vertrieben  (?)."  I  would  translate  "He  of  Dur 
lakin  was  driven  out."  For  this  use  of  sha,  cf.  Muss-Arnolt,  e.  g.,  sha 
hit  gihitti,  "  prisoner."  Is  sha  here  rather  taken  collectively  ?  Under 
70s,  Rm.  2,  97,  has  only  Dur  lakin  nahil,  "  Dur  lakin  was  destroyed." 
The  failure  to  remark  the  death  of  Sargon  is  noteworthy.  In  this  it 
seems  to  agree  with  Bah.  Chron.,  another  point  seeming  to  show  a 
southern  connection  for  Rm.  2,  97. 


ELAMITISH    WARS   AND   CONQUEST   OF   BABYLON         1 4/ 

it  would  seem  as  if  South  Babylonia  was  all  in  revolt.  For 
a  time  Sennacherib  was  able  to  hold  Babylon  and  the  North, 
but  even  this  finally  went  over  to  Merodach  Baladan,  who 
once  more  for  a  short  while  held  rule  over  all  Babylonia.®^ 

""The  whole  history  of  this  later  part  of  Sargon's  reign  and  the  first 
part  of  Sennacherib  is  very  obscure,  especially  as  it  relates  to  Babylon. 
The  text  furnishes  only  a  working  hypothesis. 


CHAPTER   VIII 

THE  LAST  YEARS 

With  the  accession  of  Argishtish  IP  to  the  throne  of 
Haldia,  about  the  year  711,  the  situation  became  once  more 
as  serious  as  it  had  been  under  Rusash.  As  usual,  the  new 
king  was  more  anxious  for  war  than  his  father,  and  hostili- 
ties, which  seem  to  have  been  intermitted  for  two  or  three 
years,  broke  out  anew.  The  first  year  or  two  of  his  reign 
seems  to  have  been  spent  in  building  for  himself  a  new  city, 
Argishtihina,  whose  ruins  are  probably  to  be  found  at 
Arjish,^  and  in  constructing  a  reservoir  for  it.^ 

In  710  the  opportunity  seemed  to  have  come.  Sargon 
was  in  Babylonia  with  his  best  troops  and  engaged  with 
powerful  enemies  who,  if  allied  with  Argishtish,  as  seems 
to  have  been  the  case,  would  no  doubt  call  upon  him  to  make 
a  diversion.  For  the  events  of  these  last  few  years  we  de- 
pend, not  on  the  edited  documents  intended  to  glorify  the 
king,  but  on  the  very  letters  which  passed  between  the  gen- 
erals in  the  field  and  the  king  himself  or  his  son,  Sen- 
nacherib, who  was  left  in  charge  of  the  north  with  head- 
quarters at  Kalhu,  while  his  father  was  at  Babylon.*    Thus, 

*  Argishtish  appears  as  Argista  in  the  letters  and  as  Argisti  in  D.  113. 
Argishtu  is  mentioned  in  the  inscription  of  an  unknown  Assyrian 
king  from  Dehok,  Belck  and  Lchmann,  Sitzungsher.  Berl.  Acad.,  1900, 
624,  no.   12. 

'  H.   Lynch,  Armenia,   1901,  II.  29. 

'No.  130,  131  of  Belck  and  Lehmann,  /.  c. 

*  In  K.  125  =  H.  196;  also  Winckler,  Samnilung,  II.  16;  Johns,  Proc. 
Soc.  Bibl.  Arch.,  1895,  2^6  f. ;  Bah.  and  Assyr.  Laws,  Contracts  and 
Letters,  1904,  345,  we  have  a  letter  from  Sennacherib  sending  some 
Qummuh  chiefs  on  to  his  father  at  Babylon.      In  K.   5464  =  1!.   198, 

148 


THE   LAST   YEARS  149 

in  spite  of  the  difficulty  of  interpretation  and  of  arrangement, 
we  are  enabled  to  gain  a  far  more  correct  and  more  vivid  idea 
of  the  campaigns  than  we  can  for  any  other  part  of  the 
reign.^ 

Our  first  letters  would  seem  to  come  from  the  winter  of 
710-9,  when  Sargon  was  already  in  control  of  Babylon.  At 
this  time  Argishtish  seems  to  have  been  collecting  his  troops 
at  his  new  city  of  Argishtihina,  which  lay  on  the  north  side 
and  might  therefore  be  supposed  to  be  out  of  sight  from  the 
Assyrians.  But  Sargon  had  a  good  intelligence  depart- 
ment, and  rumors  began  to  reach  him.     Ashur  rigua,  for 

also  Winckler,  op.  cit.,  II.  8;  Johns,  Proc,  230  if.;  Laws,  339  ff.; 
Sennacherib,  again  writing  to  his  father,  says  that  a  messenger  has 
come  to  Kalhu.  In  Rm,  2,  2,  14:=!!.  730,  Johns,  Proc.  Soc.  Bibl. 
Arch.,  1895,  238  if.,  also  by  Sennacherib,  we  have  references  to  Nabu 
from  Kalhu  and  to  Nabu  etir  napshati,  according  to  Sargon,  12,  45,  the 
scribe  of  the  governor  of  that  city. 

^  The  Assyrian  letters,  after  a  few  had  been  published  in  desultory 
fashion,  are  now  being  edited  as  a  complete  corpus  by  Harper, 
Assyrian  and  Babylonian  Letters.  References  to  other  publications 
of  individual  texts  are  given  under  each  separate  letter.  The  first 
collection  of  letters  dealing  with  this  period  was  given  by  Johns, 
Proc,  1895,  220  if.  Later  Thompson,  Amer.  Jour.  Sem.  Lang.,  1901, 
162  if.,  gave  an  important  sketch  of  the  history  to  be  gained  from  these 
letters  but  gave  no  extended  quotations.  Some  letters  are  still  known 
only  from  his  references.  Although  he  was  mistaken  in  placing  these 
events  in  the  time  of  Rusash,  as  is  now  quite  clear,  he  grasped  the 
general  arrangement  of  the  material  that  was  required,  and  I  have  quite 
generally  followed  his  order.  On  the  basis  of  his  notes,  I  began  the 
study  of  the  untranslated  letters  he  pointed  out,  so  far  as  they  were 
published,  but  was  forced  to  lay  aside  the  work  when  I  began  to  prepare 
for  Syria.  On  my  return,  I  found  that  this  work  was  rendered  useless 
by  the  translations  of  all  the  piiblished  texts  referring  to  the  Armenian 
wars  by  Johns,  Laws,  338  if.  Aside  from  this  group,  my  work  on  the 
letters  has  been  sporadic.  Some  references  to  them  will  be  found  in 
other  chapters.  During  the  last  year,  I  collected  a  considerable  mass 
of  data  in  preparation  for  an  assignment  of  these  letters  to  various 
reigns  and  to  historic  events  or  groups  of  events. 


150  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

example,  who  so  often  appears  in  these  events,^  was  ordered 
to  send  one  of  his  spies  to  Turushpa,  the  older  capital  of 
Haldia,  on  the  site  of  the  present  Van/  whence  a  raid 
might  be  expected.®  As  a  result,  perhaps,  of  this  investiga- 
tion, Ashur  rigua  next  learned  that  Argishtish  had  now 
entered  Turushpa  and  had  there  captured  the  second  tartan, 
Urgine,®  with  his  Assyrian  army.  The  tartan,  it  would 
seem,  had  advanced  incautiously,  thinking  that  the  Haldian 
was  still  at  Argistihina.  Now  his  brother,  Apli  uknu,  had 
gone  off  to  see  him,  presumably  under  a  truce,  and  was 
about  to  investigate  the  cause  of  the  capture.  The  near 
approach  of  the  Haldian  army  had  quite  naturally  led  to 
disaffection  among  Sargon's  soldiers,  many  of  them  captives 
who  had  seen  their  homes  destroyed  and  relatives  killed  by 
the  men  who  now  forced  them  to  fight  their  cause.  Narage, 
a  rab  kigir,  plotted  revolt,  and  was  followed  by  twenty  of 
his  men.  Ashur  rigua,  however,  detected  it  in  time  and  the 
plotters  were  sent  back  from  the  front.^**  Another  example 
of  the  disaffection  felt  may  be  seen  in  a  letter  from  Sha 
Ashur  dubbu,  governor  of  Tushhan.  Two  officers  and  six 
men  were  sent  with  warrants, — seal  in  hand,  the  Assyrian 
says, — for    deserters    in    Penza   on   the    Haldian    frontier. 

"Johns,  Laws,  341,  is  no  doubt  correct  in  making  him  the  head  scribe 
of  the  harem,  Sarg  12,  45,  Strassmaier,  Alphabet.  Verzeich.,  880,  dated 
Kalhu,  709. 

'  For  the  various  forms  of  Turushpa  or  Tushpa,  the  classical  Lake 
Thospites,  the  Armenian  Tosp,  cf.  Sayce,  Jour.  Roy.  Asiat.  Soc,  1882. 

'K.  1907  =  H.  148.  Badly  mutilated  and  little  to  be  gotten  out  of  it. 
Cf.  Thompson,  /.  c,  163,  and  Johns,  Laws,  342. 

'  Is  he  the  amel  shanute  to  whom  Ashur  rigua  writes  a  very  urgent 
letter,  81-7-27,  199  =  H.  382,  requesting  a  reply  to  his  former  message? 
If  so,  then  perhaps  he  was  already  a  prisoner  and  this  just  precedes  the 
next  letter  quoted,  n.    10. 

^^  K.  194  =:H.  144,  a  letter  of  Ashur  rigua,  referred  to  Thompson, 
164,  and  Johns,  341  f.      The  second  part  does  not  seem  to  refer  to  the 


THE   LAST   YEARS  I5I 

While  on  their  way  they  fell  into  an  ambush  set  by  a  Shu- 
prian  whose  brother  had  just  been  treacherously  eating  with 
them  to  throw  them  off  their  guard.  Fortunately  they  es- 
caped. The  governor  has  ordered  a  guard, — for  he  has 
cavalry  as  well  as  infantry, — to  be  stationed  here  and  will 
carry  on  a  full  investigation.^^  Another  letter  of  his  gives 
further  news  of  the  Penza  affair,  it  would  seem,  as  well  as 
of  conditions  on  the  frontier.  A  messenger  of  Bagteshub 
has  brought  news  from  the  front,  but  Bagteshub  himself 
has  not  obeyed  orders,  and  a  copy  of  the  reprimand  sent 
him  is  given.^^ 

Frontier  conditions  were  certainly  growing  alarming. 
Akkul  anu  was  cut  off  and  besought  the  king  for  a  reply.^* 
Another  letter  from  Upahhir  Bel,  governor  of  Ameda,  re- 
ports that  he  is  still  in  Harda  and  has  sent  a  scout  to  the 
frontier.  The  governor  of  an  unknown  city,  perhaps  Akku- 
lanu,  has  sent  asking  aid.  Upahhir  Bel  replies  by  urging 
him  to  remain  shut  up  close  in  his  forts  and  he  will  deliver 
him.^*  But  this  must  have  been  a  boast  which  Upahhir  Bel 
was  unable  to  fulfil,  for  when  we  next  hear  of  him  he  has 
been  forced  to  fall  back,  and  Haldian  officials  are  at  Harda, 

"K.  469  =  H.'  138;  Johnston,  Jour.  Amer.  Orient.  Soc,  1897,  152  /. 
=  Harper,  Literature,  2^7. 

"  K.   1067  =  H.   139,  cf.  Johnston,  op.  cit.,  151. 

"K.  604  =  H.  444;  Smith,  Ashur  bani  pal,  II.  15;  Delitzsch,  Beitr. 
z.  Assyr.,  I.  222. 

"  K.  593  =  H.  548,  cf.  Johns,  Proc.  Soc.  Bibl.  Arch.,  1902,  297,  and 
Laws,  344.  Johns  is  perfectly  justified  in  attributing  it  to  Upahhir  Bel 
as  the  reconstruction  shows.  But  he  makes  one  very  curious  error. 
A  slightly  mutilated  line  which  can  be  restored  only  as  (amel)aqi, 
"  messenger,"  and  noting  that  he  was  sent  to  Haldia  according  to 
orders  from  the  king,  is  read  Argista  by  Johns.  He  then,  neglecting 
the  fact  that  the  appeal  and  reply  relate  to  a  governor,  reconstructs 
the  history  in  a  rather  surprising  way,  making  this  a  submission  of  the 
Haldian  king  to  Assyrian  suzerainty  on  account  of  the  Cimmerian  in- 

va<sinn  I 


152  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

his  old  quarters.  From  here  to  Turushpa,  where  the  king 
still  was,  they  keep  guard.  There  is  no  immediate  danger 
of  attack,  for  a  captured  letter  from  Argishtish  to  the 
governor  of  Harda  forbids  for  the  present  further  advance. 
The  Ituai,  who  seem  to  have  been  a  sort  of  military  caste, 
have  been  called  in.  The  palace  Ituai  who  has  come  from 
the  Euphrates  has  gone  off  with  one  or  two  "  houses  "  of 
the  governor's  sukalli.  The  Ituai  who  inspected  beams  at 
Eziat  has  been  sent  of  with  the  rob  ali,  or  mayor,  to  the 
front.  An  engagement  has  taken  place  and  the  Assyrians 
have  been  worsted.  The  enemy  lost  only  three  wounded, 
while  the  Assyrians  suffered  a  loss  of  two  killed  and  ten 
wounded,  including  the  lieutenant  of  the  rab  ali.  Upahhir 
Bel  is  now  at  Shuruba  and  must  have  an  army  there  by 
harvest  time  to  support  him.^'^ 

But  still  worse  news  was  to  come  to  Sennacherib,  for 
while  Argishtish  was  still  at  Turushpa  sacrificing,  and  with 
all  his  governors  around  him,  ready  for  an  advance,  the 
Mannai,  whose  traditional  policy  was  to  side  with  Assyria, 
broke  away  and  made  a  raid  on  Assyrian  territory.  Analu- 
qunu,  the  governor  of  Mugagir,  and  Tunnaun,  governor  of 
Karsitu,^®  hastened  to  the  boundary,  but  the  Mannai  had 
already  retreated.  Such  was  the  news  of  Ashur  rigua.^^ 
Gabbu  ana  Ashur,  who  had  arrived  at  his  province  of 
Kurban,^®  in  Tammuz  (July),  sends  in  a  report  a  month 
later,  in  Ab.  On  his  arrival  he  sent  messengers  to  Nabu 
liu,  Ashur  bel  danan,  and  Ashur  rigua,  who  were  at  the  forts 

"S.  760  =  H.  424;  S.  A.  Smith,  Ashur  bani  pal,  III.  53  ff.;  van 
Gelderen,  XIX;  Johns,  Lazvs,  344. 

"Johns  reads  Kar  Sippar. 

"81-2-4,  SS=:H.  381;  Harper,  Amer.  Jour.  Sent.  Lang.,  1897,  212; 
van   Gelderen,   IX;   Johns,  Laws,   342;    Thompson,    164. 

"Floods  are  reported  in  Kurban  by  Sennacherib  in  the  letter  81-7-27, 
41  =:  H.   731.      These  occurred  in   708,  cf.  Johns,  Laws,   345. 


THE    LAST    YEARS  153 

immediately  before  the  enemy.  Now  the  messengers  have 
returned  and  report  that  Argishtish  is  still  in  Turushpa.^® 
From  another  letter  we  learn  that  there  were  ten  Assyrian 
generals  operating  in  this  region.^^  About  the  same  time 
must  have  taken  place  the  revolt  of  the  Zikirtai.^^ 

The  events  of  this  year  had  been  most  favorable  for 
Haldia.  On  the  northwest  Mutallu  of  Qummuh  had  been 
drawn  away."  Then  along  the  whole  southern  boundary 
of  Haldia  an  advance  had  been  made  and  disaffection  was 
spreading  in  the  enemy's  ranks.  The  situation  seemed  black 
enough  for  Assyria,  with  even  the  Zikirtai  and  their  faith- 
ful Mannai  gone. 

The  operations  of  the  next  year,  708,  were  no  more  cal- 
culated to  restore  confidence  to  Sargon.  At  the  beginning 
of  Nisan  (April),  Argishtish  at  last  advanced,  first  to 
Qaniun^^  and  then  to  Eliggadu  where  he  was  met  by  the 
levy  from  all  Armenia.-*  Meanwhile,  Qaqqadanu,  his  tartan, 
had  been  sent  on  to  Uesi  with  four  other  officers.^**    After 

"K.  574  =:H.  123.  Cf.  Thompson,  164  and  Johns,  343.  The 
latter  does  not  name  the  letter  he  quotes  from. 

^  K.  1182  =  H.  619,  c£,  Johns,  Laws,  345. — K.  910  =:  H.  145,  cf. 
Johns,  Laws,  342,  is  a  letter  from  Ashur  rigua  to  the  abarakku,  con- 
cerning the  Ukkai  messenger,  A  somewhat  similar  letter  from  him  is 
forwarded  by  Tab  gil  Ashur  to  the  king,  K.  561  =  H.  loi,  cf,  Johns, 
Laws,  342, 

^^  K.  1037  =:  H.  215;  Winckler,  Sammlung,  II,  13;  Thompson,  164, 
from  the  same  Bagteshub  who  is  reprimanded  by  Sha  Ashur  dubbu, 
cf.  n.  12,  The  revolt  of  the  Mannai  is  known  and  reference  is  made 
to  a  city  Shulman?    ... 

=^  Cf,  chap.  V.  SZ. 

^  K,  645  =  H,  444;  van  Gelderen,  IV;  Thompson,  164;  Johns,  Laws, 
344.  * 

^*  81-2-4,  60  =  11.  492;  Thompson,  164;  Johns,  341;  from  Ashur 
rigau. 

"^  The  other  officials  were  Setinu  of  .  .  .  teni,  Sakuata  of  Qaniun, 
Siplia  of  Alzi,  Tutu  of  Armiraliu.  Johns,  /.  c,  is  probably  correct  in 
attributing   this   to   Ashur   rigua.       This   advance   is   also   mentioned   in 


154  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

a  long  delay,  during  which  he  received  the  tribute  of  the 
Zikirtai,  the  king  left  Eliggadu  and  himself  went  to  Uesi. 
His  forces  at  this  time  were  said  to  be  few.  By  this 
time  it  was  already  Elul  ( September)  .^^  Here  he  seems  to 
have  remained  until  the  beginning  of  the  next  year.^^  But 
while  still  in  Uesi,  apparently  before  the  winter  closed  in, 
he  sent  against  Mugagir  a  body  of  three  thousand  men  with 
baggage  camels  under  Setinu,  one  of  his  governors.  But 
Suna,  the  Assyrian  general  in  charge  of  the  Ukkai  country, 
who  had  already  put  down  a  revolt  at  home,-®  learned  of  this 
and  hurried  to  Mugagir  to  head  him  off.  This  he  succeeded 
in  doing,  although  not  before  the  enemy  had  crossed  the 
Calmat  river.^^  This  was  the  first  victory,  it  would  appear, 
of  all  the  operations.  An  attempt  was  made  to  push  the 
advantage  home.  The  commanders  of  Uesi  and  Ukkai,^*^ 
the  latter  Suna,  of  course,  came  to  Mugagir,  sacrificed  in  the 
famous  temple,  and  then  advanced,  the  result  being  that 
Argishtish  fell  back  to  Uesi.  This  information  was  sent 
the  king  by  no  less  a  person  that  Urzana,  king  of  Mugagir, 
the  former  friend  of  Rusash.     He  now  protests  his  loyalty 

81-2-4,  60.  Johns,  /.  c,  mentions  directly  after  these  operations  the 
fact  that  according  to  an  unpublished  text,  the  commander  of  Uesi 
was  slain.  One  gains  the  impression  that  the  Assyrian  governor 
of  Uesi  was  killed  as  a  result  of  these  movements.  But  reference  to 
Thompson,  165,  shows  that  the  governor  of  Uesi  was  one  of  the 
numerous  Haldian  nobles  who  were  slain  in  the  great  battle  with  the 
Cimmerians. 

^^  Letter  of  Ashur  rigua  quoted  by  Sennacherib,  K.  5464  ^  H.  198, 
also  Winckler,  Sammlung,  II.  8;  Johns,  Proc,  230   if.;  Laws,  339   ff. 

^  Cf.  Johns,  Laws,  341. 

''K.  5464. 

^  Rm.  2,  3  =  H.  380,  also  Harper,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  1893,  34;  G.  R. 
Berry,  Hebraica,  1895,  174  ff.;  van  Gelderen,  op.  cit.,  521  f.;  cf. 
Thompson,  165,  and  Johns,  Laws,  341.    Letter  of  Ashur  rigua. 

^°  Cf.   S.  96,  perhaps  a  part  of  Rm.  978,  Thompson,    165. 


THE    LAST    YEARS  155 

and  his  wish  to  do  whatever  the  king  orders  him.^^  This 
success  of  the  Assyrians  must  have  been  followed  by  a  re- 
verse, for  soon  after  we  find  Urzana  negotiating  a  treaty 
with  Haldia  and  his  example  followed  by  Hubushkia.^^ 
Hardly,  however,  had  the  spring  campaign  of  707  begun 
when  Argishtish  was  suddenly  drawn  to  the  north  by  a 
terrible  danger  which  now  began  to  threaten  the  civilized 
countries  of  Western  Asia.^^  Another  branch  of  that  Iranian 
race  which  was  already  pressing  so  hard  on  the  eastern 
frontier  of  Assyria  had  poured  across  the  Caucasus,  carry- 
ing everything  before  it.  Coming  out  of  their  "  Cimmerian 
darkness,"  these  Gimirrai,  so  soon  as  the  late  spring  of  the 
highlands  allowed,  began  their  operations.^*  They  struck 
the  Haldian  frontier  obliquely  and  finally  took  up  their  po- 
sition in  Cappadocia,  where  many  traces  of  their  stay  lasted 
on  in  the  later  nomenclature  of  the  region.^^  Here  they 
were  able  to  attack,  as  they  might  desire,  Phrygia  or  the 
rising  power  of  Lydia  on  the  one  hand,  or  Assyria  or  Haldia 
on  the  other.  The  land  of  Haldia  first  felt  the  presence  of 
these  barbarians  and  Argishtish  decided  to  attack  them  be- 

*^  This  letter  of  Uurzana,  Rm.  2,  2  =  H.  409  has  been  frequently 
published,  V.  R.  54;  Harper,  Zeitschr.  f.  Assyr.,  1893,  345;  Berry, 
op.  cit.;  Scheil,  Rec.  Trav.,  1897,  62;  Thompson,  165,  Johns,  Laws, 
343.  Cf.  also  S.  1056  =  H.  768  with  its  reference  to  the  land  of  Nakiri 
(or  a  hostile  land?)  and  its  protestation  of  fidelity. 

^=^K.  i8i=:H.  197,  also  V.  R.  54;  Pinches,  Proc.  Soc.  Bihl.  Arch., 
1884,  220  fF.;  Johns,  Proc,  1895,  222  ff.;  Laws,  339  ff.;  Thompson,  166. 

*'K.  1120=:  H.  596,  cf.  Thompson,  165.  One  of  these  places  con- 
quered is  the  city  ABNU.IMERU  of  the  Haldian  inscriptions  Belck 
and  Lehmann,   130,   131. 

**  Cf .  N.  Schmidt,  art.  Scythians,  Ency.  Biblica.;  Winckler,  Forsch., 
I.  484  if. 

^°  It  is  interesting  to  see  (mat)  Gamir  of  K.  181  appearing  as  Kamir 
in  Moses.  Chor.,  II,  80.  For  the  Greek  forms  Kemer,  Kamouria 
(Kamoulia),  Kamouresarbon,  see  Ramsay,  Hist.  Geog.,  304, 


156  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

fore  they  actually  crossed  his  borders.^^  At  first  he  seems 
to  have  had  some  success.  Guriania,-^®  "a  region  between 
Haldia  and  Gamirra,"  ^^  was  forced  to  pay  tribute.^®  As  the 
Haldian  advance  must  have  been  up  the  Tokhma  Su  past 
Melitene  and  Tulgarimmu,  this  whole  country  must  have 
already  been  lost  to  Assyria.  It  is  therefore  with  no  surprise 
that  we  see  Sennacherib  engaged  once  more  in  reconquering 
this  region. 

The  advantage  did  not  long  remain  to  Argishtish.  Soon 
after  he  entered  the  land  of  Gamir,*^  the  battle  with  the 
Cimmerians  took  place.  The  result  was  a  complete  defeat. 
The  king  himself  escaped  and  retreated  to  Uazaun,  but  his 
tartan,  Qaqqadanu,  was  taken  and  most  of  his  nobles  slain. 
The  defeat  was  a  terrible  one.  The  wars  with  Assyria  had 
already  weakened  Haldia,  and  now  this  came.  The  country 
was  permanently  crippled  and  never  again  became  a  serious 
menace  to  Assyria. 

The  news  spread  far  and  wide,  and  soon  reports  from  the 
various  frontier  officers  began  to  come  in  to  Sennacherib, 
who  forwarded  them  to  Sargon,*^  who  was  still  delaying  in 

^^  K.  181,  29  seems  to  indicate  that  the  battle  took  place  outside  of 
his  proper  territory. 

^  For  site  of  Guriania-Gurun,  see  chap.  IV,  n.  40. 

^  So.  Thompson,  166  n.  7.  Johns,  Laws,  342,  still  takes  Nagiu  as 
a  proper  name. 

^^  K.  1080  r=:H.  146,  cf.  Thompson,  166;  Johns,  Laws,  342,  by  Ashur 
rigua. 

*"  K.  181;  Rm.  554,  Thompson,  165. 

"  These  forwarded  reports  are  from  the  Ukkai,  from  Ashur  rigua, 
and  from  Nabu  liu,  K.  181.  Other  references  to  the  great  defeat  are 
in  Rm.  554,  Thompson,  165,  from  Urzana ;  in  K.  iiii^rH.  590, 
where  a  nameless  official  sends  the  report  of  the  defeat  given  by  Sania, 
bel  all  of  Qaqqadanu;  and  in  K.  1080.  K.  485  =  H.  112  from  Ardi 
Ishtar  reports  the  defeat,  mentions  the  booty,  and  says  that  Umar, 
Buliai,  Surianai,  cities  of  Urartu,  feared  greatly.  These  should  be 
sought  near  the  Euphrates  boundary.      K.   7434  =  H.   199   from   Senna- 


THE    LAST    YEARS  157 

Babylon.  The  news  seems  to  have  aroused  him,  for  by  the 
end  of  the  year  707  he  was  once  more  back  in  Assyria.^- 
The  next  year  he  himself  took  the  field  in  Tabal,  though  now 
an  old  man.*^  For  a  time  there  seems  to  have  been  no 
decisive  battle,  the  Cimmerians  probably  being  weakened  by 
their  late  contest,  while  Sargon  would  follow  a  more  cau- 
tious policy.  But  in  the  year  705  he  was  forced  to  give 
battle  to  the  Cimmerians,  who  seem  now  to  have  been  led 
by  Eshpai  the  Kulummite.  The  king  fell  in  the  ensuing 
conflict  and  his  camp  was  taken.^*  Later  his  body  was  re- 
covered and,  after  much  opposition  for  some  unknown 
cause  by  the  priests,*^  his  son  buried  it  with  all  the  necessary 

cheno  has  only  the  address. — K.  622  =:  H.  306,  c£.  Delattre,  Proc.  Soc. 
Dibl.  Arch.,  1901,  59  /.,  is  a  rather  sharp  "word  of  the  king"  to  Nabu 
dur  ugur,  ordering  him  to  send  at  once  to  headquarters  the  Haldian 
prisoners  who  are  at  Arapha  in  the  charge  of  the  body  guard  Mannu  ki 
Ashur. 

"  Rm,  2,  97,  "the  king  returned  from  Babylon."  So  in  D.  114  the 
king's  stay  seems  to  end  in  year  III  =  707. 

*^ Bab.  Chron.,  II.  9.  The  sharru  mu  ig(f)  must  refer  to  the  same 
expedition  though  it  is  placed,  if  we  admit  the  relative  position  to 
mean  anything,  early  in  the  year.  What  the  king  is  doing  I  do  not 
know,  although  I  have  puzzled  over  it  many  times. 

**  II.  R.  69.  Delitzsch,  after  a  new  collation,  Beitr.  zur  Assyr.,  I. 
615  n.,  reads  ina  muhhi  Eshpai,  etc.,  "  against  Eshpai."  The  next  line 
begins  with  sharru,  "  king,"  not  amelu.  The  following  sign  is  GAZ 
which,  cf.  Briinnow,  means  daku  or  some  other  word  for  "  destroy," 
etc.  Daku  means  "  to  fight "  as  well  as  "  to  destroy."  May  the 
ideogram  here  have  some  such  meaning  as  "  hostile "  ?  Madaktam 
seems  to  mean  only  "  camp."  We  may  then  translate  this  line  "  A 
hostile  king  the  camp  of  the  king  of  Assyria  [took]." 

"  K.  4730,  published  Winckler,  Sammlung,  II.  52  f. ;  translated 
Forsch.,  I.  410  ff.,  with  the  exception  of  rev.  19-26.  Winckler  would 
also  make  the  well-known  triumph  song  of  Is.  14*-^'*  refer  to  this.  I 
do  not  see  how  a  mere  postponement  of  burial  would  agree  with  i8-2oa, 
a  complete  lack  of  burial.  Nor  do  I  see  why  this  would  make  the 
prophet  exclaim  "  How  hath  the  golden  city  ceased !  "  when  the  death 
of  Sargon  made  so  little  difference  in  Assyria's  power  in  Syria. 


158  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

pomp.**^    On  the  twelfth  of  Ab  (August)   Sennacherib  for- 
mally ascended  the  throne  and  a  new  reign  began.*^ 

"81-2-4,  6s  =  H.  473,  discussed  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  148  may  belong 
here.  It  reports  the  bringing  of  the  news  of  the  king's  death  to  the 
palace.  The  city  of  Ashur  wept,  the  governor  abandoned  his  home  life 
and  sent  away  his  wife,  his  shaque  put  on  dark  clothes  and  gold  rings. 
Kisai  and  his  daughters,  the  professional  mourners,  chanted  funeral 
dirges  before  the  officials.  Then  the  corpse  was  escorted  to  the  gate 
with  weeping, 

"  II.  R.  69. — My  chronology  for  the  chapter  is  of  course  conjectural 
but  seems  to  work  out  well  enough.  Sargon  died  in  705  in  the  great 
battle.  In  706,  he  was  already  in  Tabal  where  that  battle  took  place. 
But  this  was  also  the  place  where  Argishtish  was  defeated  by  the 
Cimmerians,  This  took  place  while  Sargon  was  still  living  and  at 
Babylon.  Sargon  returned  to  Assyria  in  707  and  it  is  natural  to 
assume  that  he  found  affairs  too  threatening  on  the  northwest  and  the 
reason  for  this  threatening  condition  must  have  been  the  defeat  of  the 
Haldians.  If,  then,  Sargon  returned  late  in  707,  the  Haldian  defeat 
could  have  taken  place  in  the  summer  of  that  year.  At  most,  we  can 
place  it  in  708,  These  are  the  limits  on  one  side.  On  the  other,  we 
know  that  the  trouble  could  not  have  broken  out  before  710-709,  since 
these  letters  assume  that  Sargon  is  already  in  Babylon,  The  limits 
are  therefore  710-709  and  708-707,  at  most  three  years.  This  does 
actually  seem  to  be  the  amount  of  time  demanded,  if  our  reconstruction 
is  true.  The  first  reports  of  preparation  would  naturally  be  in  the 
winter,  while  the  advance  to  Turushpia  would  take  place  in  the  spring. 
In  July  he  is  still  there  and  in  fact  he  did  not  leave  until  April,  of 
course,  in  the  following  year.  This  gives  something  over  one  year. 
If  we  assign  the  preparation  to  the  winter  of  710-709,  the  July  to  709, 
and  the  April  to  708,  we  are  putting  it  as  early  as  we  can.  In  Sep- 
tember, 708,  the  king  is  at  Uesi.  The  attempt  on  Mugagir,  the  falling 
back  again  to  Uesi,  the  final  winning  of  Mugagir  and  Hubushkia,  and 
the  retreat  back  to  within  his  own  frontier  may  possibly  have  taken 
place  all  after  September,  708.  More  probably,  it  was  in  the  early 
spring  of  707  that  the  latter  of  these  events  took  place.  The  more 
severe  winters  further  north  would  make  the  time  for  the  Cimmerian 
breaking  up  of  camp  somewhat  later.  It  would  take  time  for  the  mes- 
sengers to  come,  for  the  Haldians  to  retreat,  and  for  a  new  advance 
to  be  made  into  Cappadocia.  The  battle  would  then  take  place,  say, 
in  the  autumn  of  707,  the  very  latest  possible  time,  for,  at  very  latest, 
in   the  winter   of   707    Sargon   had   heard   of  the   defeat   and   was   back 


THE    LAST    YEARS  159 

home.  The  data  therefore  exactly  fill  the  space  allowed  and  a  better 
confirmation  of  our  reconstruction  could  hardly  be  asked. — If  this  is 
all  true, — and  I  do  not  see  how  the  events  of  the  letters  can  be  placed 
later  than  707, — we  face  a  startling  question.  If  the  group  of  docu- 
ments of  which  the  Annals  and  the  Display  Inscription  are  the  most 
important,  was  made  in  707,  cf.  chap.  I,  why  are  these  events  not 
referred  to?  Only  in  the  Qummuh  troubles  de  we  have  an  allusion 
that  can  be  connected  with  the  letters.  Was  a  general  lack  of  success 
on  this  frontier  the  cause  of  the  letter  material  not  being  worked  up? 


CHAPTER   IX 

THE  CULTURE  LIFE 

In  a  historical  study,  even  as  brief  and  as  confined  in  its 
limits  as  this,  some  attention  must  be  paid  to  the  culture 
history.  Always  more  difficult  to  investigate  than  political 
history,  it  is  especially  so  when  an  attempt  must  be  made  to 
indicate  what  were  the  lines  of  development  in  so  short  a 
time.  If  we  were  to  take  the  reign  of  Sargon  as  typical 
of  Assyria  and  were  to  present  a  fairly  complete  picture  of 
the  general  civilization  of  the  age,  it  might  be  allowable  to 
draw  from  the  more  abundant  data  relating  to  the  later 
Sargonid  days.  As  the  present  production  is  a  study  rather 
than  a  complete  presentation,  this  chapter  will  contain  merely 
certain  observations  on  the  civilization  of  the  reign  of 
Sargon. 

In  the  preceding  chapters  almost  exclusive  attention  has 
been  given  to  the  military  history.  To  a  large  extent  this 
has  been  forced  by  the  nature  of  our  sources,  which  are 
largely  war  annals.  But  we  are  not  called  upon  especially  to 
regret  this.  To  a  nation  so  essentially  warlike,  the  military 
history  is  the  most  important  as  well  as  the  most  typical. 
The  real  Assyrian  race  was  only  a  conquering  caste  settled 
among  a  conquered  population  and  constantly  forced  to 
extend  its  territories,  since  no  real  frontier  could  be  found. 
Under  these  conditions,  racial  solidarity  was  demanded,  as 
well  as  constant  preparation  for  war,  and  to  secure  this,  as 
at  Sparta,  all  else  was  subordinated  to  the  military  life.  The 
whole  essence  of  life  was  military  and  can  be  understood 
only  in  this  light.    Even  business  and  religion  took  on  mili- 

i6o 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  l6l 

tary  forms.  The  great  mission  of  Assyria  in  the  pre-classical 
period,  as  of  Rome  in  the  classical,  was  the  dissemination  by 
arms  of  the  culture  of  an  earlier  civilization.  With  less 
adequate  a  basis  in  the  native  population  and  with  smaller 
powers  of  organization  and  assimilation,  it  had  less  success, 
yet  the  period  when  the  older  civilizations  were  amalgamated 
to  so  large  an  extent  in  its  empire  must  be  considered  one  of 
the  germinative  periods  of  human  history.  Nor  must  we 
forget  that  it  is  to  these  very  war  annals  that  we  owe  much 
of  our  knowledge  of  customs,  of  the  history,  perhaps  even 
the  existence  of  important  Asiatic  peoples.^ 

In  a  people  thus  settled  as  a  conquering  caste  among  a 
non-Semitic  race,^  all  depended  naturally  upon  the  army. 
In  the  earlier  days  this  had  consisted  of  only  the  feudal  levy, 
"  the  people  in  arms,"  and  survivals  existed  on  into  the  reign 
of  Sargon.^  But  by  this  time  the  energy  which  had  once 
enabled  them  to  send  off  colonies  to  settle  conquered  dis- 
tricts was  gone.  The  attempted  conquest  of  the  world  had 
proved  too  much  for  Assyrian  resources,  and  at  this  period 
Assyria  was  just  recovering  from  one  of  her  seasons  of 
exhaustion.  No  doubt  Sargon  was  doing  the  only  thing  he 
could  when  he  changed, — if,  indeed,  to  him  belongs  the  credit, 
— from  the  old  feudal  levy  to  a  standing  army.    We  must 

^  The  earlier  students  of  Assyriology  were  largely  content  with  a 
mere  statement  of  known  facts.  The  views  enunciated  in  this  chapter 
in  general  find  their  origin,  if  not  their  present  form,  in  various  studies 
put  forth  by  Winckler  in  his  Forschungen  and  in  other  works.  Many 
sketches  of  isolated  portions  of  the  subject  are  well  given  by  Maspero 
in  his  Empires.  The  mass  of  material  presented  by  Johns  in  his 
Deeds  is  of  the  greatest  value,  as  are  discussions  on  various  social 
questions  which  deserve  more  attention  from  the  non-oriental  scholar 
than  they  are  likely  to  secure,  immure'd  as  they  are  in  material  under- 
standable only  by  an  Assyriologist. 

'  Cf.,  e.  g.,  Johns,  Deeds. 

^  Cf.  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  49  if.,  for  the  phrase  adki  ummanatia,  "  I 
called  out  my  troops." 


1 62  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

not  measure  the  wisdom  of  this  departure  by  the  success  of 
standing  armies  in  modern  times,   for  centraUzation  then 
coincided  with  the  growth  of  national  sentiment  and  of  a 
healthy  social  condition.     Here  there  was  no  free  peasant 
or  commercial  class  to  fall  back  upon,  and,  with  the  decay 
of  the  old  feudal  nobility  and  their  followers,  the  standing 
army  could  be  recruited  only  from  captives,  from  slaves,  or 
from  mercenaries.     Of  the  first  method  we  have  sufficient 
proof.    As  has  been  noted  in  other  chapters,  the  usual  pro- 
ceeding after  the  conquest  of  a  place  was  to  enroll  the  cap- 
tured soldiers  into  the  royal  army.    Furthermore,  there  are 
references  in  the  letters  to  soldiers  of  various  nationalities, 
who,  however,  are  combined,  so  far  as  possible,  to  break  up 
racial  feeling  and  to  substitute  corps  spirit."*    In  some  cases, 
as  at  Carchemish,  there  were  probably  mercenaries  who 
were  taken  over,  at  any  rate,  there  seem  to  have  been  foreign 
mercenaries  enlisted.*^     From  the  business  documents  we 
know  that  slaves  were  subject  to  requisition  by  the  military 
as  by  the  civil  authorities.^    For  a  time,  at  least,  the  new 
arrangement  succeeded  in  spite  of  the  poorer  material.    The 
new  army  could  be  better  organized  and  better  directed  than 
the  old.    The  unit  seems  to  have  been  the  fifty,  that  is,  of 
fifty  groups,  each  consisting  of  a  spearman  and  bowman, 

*Note  the  letter  K.  4286  of  the  time  of  Sennacherib  with  its  data 
as  to  the  composition  of  the  Assyrian  army  and  the  discussion  in  Johns, 
Deeds,  II.  170  if. — For  the  "camp  of  Sargon,"  cf.  Botta,  Ninive,  pi. 
146  and  Place,  pi.  40. 

"  Note  that  the  Itu'ai,  at  first  a  tribe,  later  became  a  sort  of  military 
caste.  Compare  also  K.  341  =  J.  364  of  679  where  we  have  a  rab 
kigir  official  over  the  Gimirai. 

•In  the  business  documents,  the  seller  of  a  slave  or  serf  quite 
regularly  guarantees  the  buyer  against  loss  caused  by  requisition  for 
service,  not  only  from  the  civil  but  from  the  military  officials,  cf.  Johns, 
Deeds,  II.  49. 

^D.  114. 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  1 63 

and  to  this  a  few  chariots  and  cavalry  were  attached,  the 
whole  being  under  a  captain  of  fifty.  These  groups  again 
were  under  a  higher  officer,  generally  the  governor  of  the 
region  they  were  operating  in.  In  addition,  there  seems  to 
have  been  a  royal  body  guard,  its  members  generally  As- 
syrians, composed  of  chariots,  foot  and  cavalry.  Individual 
members  seem  to  have  held  important  commissions  and  even 
commanded  other  troops  in  war.  A  good  intelligence  de- 
partment existed  and  intelligence  officers,  scouts,  and  spies 
are  mentioned  in  the  letters.  Siege  engines  were  much 
used,  as  the  reliefs  show.  The  leaders  understood  something 
of  tactics,  and  those  who  follow  up  their  expeditions  on  the 
map  cannot  deny  a  certain  knowledge  of  strategy.  There 
seem  to  have  been  general  plans  for  the  campaigns,  which 
were  often  carried  on  along  an  extended  frontier,  where 
cooperation  of  the  operating  bodies  was  needed.^ 

At  the  head  of  the  government  was  the  king.  In  theory, 
his  will  seems  to  have  been  absolute,  though  tempered  in 
practice  by  a  goodly  number  of  revolts.  There  is  no  proof 
that  there  was  any  council  regularly  constituted  to  advise 
him,  but  there  are  indications  that  the  nobles  had  much 
influence  and  were  not  afraid  to  speak  their  mind  on  oc- 
casion. Around  the  king  was  a  large  circle  of  high  officials 
at  the  head  of  whom  was  the  tartan,  corresponding  to  the 
wazir  of  modern  Turkey.  For  the  earlier  part  of  the  reign 
this  was  Ashur  icka  danin,^  a  man  probably  as  old  as  Sargon 
himself,  since  he  was  eponym  in  720.    He  was  assisted  by  a 

*  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  91  ff.  The  scattered  information  in  the  letters 
regarding  the  army  is  of  the  greatest  value  but  is  uncollected.  The 
royal  inscriptions  tell  us  of  campaigns  but  give  little  in  regard  to  real 
fnilitary  questions.  The  best  discussion  of  the  army  as  a  whole  is 
in  Billerbeck  and  Jeremias'  study  of  the  fall  of  Nineveh,  Beitr.  z.  Assyr., 
III. 

®  So   K.  998,  quoted  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  69.      He  was  eponym  in   720. 


164  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

second  and  perhaps  a  third  tartan.  How  important  his 
personality  was  we  cannot  tell,  for  in  his  earlier  period 
Sargon  would  have  been  active  enough  to  carry  on  his  own 
affairs,  while  from  710  at  least  Sennacherib  was  in  charge 
of  Assyria  proper,  and  was  in  direct  control  of  the  opera- 
tions against  Haldia.^*'  Another  official  whose  influence 
must  have  been  great  was  Tab  gil  esharra,  who  occupied  the 
post  of  governor  of  Ashur,  the  mother  city  of  Assyria  and 
the  especial  favorite  of  Sargon  for  the  greater  part  of  his 
reign.^^  Still  another  was  Ashur  bani,  governor  of  Kalhu, 
where  the  king  for  a  good  portion  of  his  time  held  his 
court.^2 

The  cities  of  Assyria,  then,  had  their  governors,  but  seem 
to  have  had,  at  least  so  far  as  the  citizens  were  concerned,  a 
position  superior  to  that  of  the  ordinary  provincials.  The 
same  was  true  of  the  culture  nations  of  Mesopotamia  and 
Babylon,  which,  however  often  they  revolted,  were  never 
made  actual  provinces,  but  were  rather  united  in  a  sort  of 
personal  union  where  the  only  bond,  at  least  in  theory,  was 
the  fact  that  they  had  a  common  ruler.  Although  this  theory 
did  not  represent  the  true  state  of  affairs,  yet  it  had  a 
considerable  influence  on  it.  Mesopotamia  was  gradually 
becoming  more  and  more  a  part  of  Assyria,  and  it  would 
appear  that  Shalmaneser  had  attempted  to  make  the  trans- 
formation complete  by  taking  away  the  ancient  rights  of 
Harran,  the  capital,  perhaps  by  taking  away  all  rights  to  a 
separate  government.  Sargon  came  to  the  throne  as  a  re- 
sult of  a  reaction,  and  his  first  care  was  to  restore  the  lost 
rights  to  Harran,  and  he  regularly  employed  throughout  his 

^o  Cf.  last  chapter. 

"Tab  gil  esharra,  as  governor  of  Ashur,  was  eponym  in  716.  He  is 
still  there  in  K.  507,  probably  of  709  or  710. 

^^  Ashur  bani  was  eponym  713.  He  was  still  governor  of  Kalhu  the 
next  year,  K.  351  =  J.  6^(). 


THE   CULTURE   LIFE  1 65 

reign  the  title  "  King  of  the  World,"  which  was  the  ancient 
title  of  the  kings  of  Mesopotamia. 

But,  while  Mesopotamia  was  thus  being  Assyrianized,  it 
was  different  in  Babylonia  which,  even  yet,  was  so  fre- 
quently its  own  ruler  that  it  had  not  forgotten  what  freedom 
meant.  The  whole  country  had  forgotten  largely  its  old 
rivalries  and  now  rallied  around  Babylon.  It  could  never 
forget  that  it  was  older  and  more  civilized  than  Assyria, 
and  this  natural  prejudice  Sargon,  as  a  believer  in  the  good 
old  times,  and  perhaps  also  as  an  astute  statesman,  respected. 
He !'  seized  the  hands  of  Bel  "  with  due  ceremony  and  thus 
became  their  own  personal  ruler.  Unlike  the  other  As- 
syrian kings  who  ruled  Babylon  thus,  there  was  no  need  of 
a  change  of  name,  for  what  name  more  suggestively  Baby- 
lonian, smacking  of  the  olden  time,  could  be  found  than 
Sargon?  Such  stress,  indeed,  was  laid  in  Babylonia  on 
the  fact  of  his  being  the  "  second  "  Sargon  that  his  name  as 
a  king  of  that  country  only  came  down  to  Greek  times  as 
Arkeanos,  "the  Second."  Thus,  so  long  as  Sargon  ruled 
Assyria,  Babylonia  was  safe,  for  he  had  the  support  of  the 
priestly  faction,  and  that  was  dominant.  But  when  Sen- 
nacherib, himself  devoted  rather  to  the  military  party  in 
Assyria,  came  to  the  throne  the  priestly  party  in  Babylonia 
had  no  choice  but  to  take  the  less  of  two  evils  and,  with 
their  own  military  party,  once  more  invoke  the  aid  of  Mero- 
dach  Baladan.^^ 

^^Winckler  in  his  various  publications,  has  worked  out  the  actual 
facts  behind  the  various  royal  titles.  The  best  bibliography  is  to  be 
found  in  Muss-Arnolt's  Lexicon  under  the  various  titles.  While  I  do 
not  see  how  the  correctness  of  his  general  conclusions  can  be  denied, 
it  seems  to  me  that  he  has  not  always  seen  that,  while  absence  of  a 
local  title  presumably  implies  that  the  locality  in  question  was  not 
in  that  king's  possession,  the  presence  of  it  merely  indicates  that  such 
control  was  claimed,  with  or  without  adequate  basis,  as  the  case  might  be. 


1 66  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

Outside  the  culture  states  thus  protected  by  the  Assy- 
rians were  the  barbarians.  Some  of  them  had  long  ago  been 
conquered  and  had  been  incorporated  into  the  provincial 
system.  Others  were  under  control  of  "  allied  kings,"  who 
for  a  time  were  supported  by  the  Assyrians  until  at  length 
the  usual  family  troubles  marking  a  new  accession  should 
force  intervention  and  annexation.  In  the  preceding  pages 
we  have  seen  something  of  the  manner  this  provincial  sys- 
tem worked.  We  have  noted  the  way  each  governor  in 
turn  gave  his  name  to  the  year  and  have  seen  that  he  was 
often  the  conductor  of  a  war  or  able  to  show  in  other  ways 
his  independence  on  the  frontier.  The  number  of  these 
governors  was  nearly  sixty,  a  sufficient  proof  of  the  smallness 
of  their  province.  In  this,  no  doubt,  we  see  a  wise  attempt 
to  limit  the  amount  of  danger  likely  to  result  from  revolt,  a 
policy  in  considerable  contrast  to  that  of  the  Persians.  Nor 
was  this  the  only  check.  The  constant  letters  showed  a 
highly  centralized  government.  With  a  royal  post  and 
trained  couriers  the  results  would  probably  not  be  far  differ- 
ent from  that  centralization  which  the  telegraph  gives  the 
Turkish  Sultan,  for,  like  him,  the  Assyrian  king  in  his 
letters  deals  with  the  minutest  details.  Rarely  do  we  have 
the  letters  sent  by  the  king,  but  how  frequent  these  must 
have  been  we  see  from  the  constant  phrase,  "As  to  what 
you  sent  about."  But  the  more  distant  governors,  such  as 
those  of  Que  or  Samaria,  must  have  had  far  more  oppor- 
tunity to  show  independent  ability  or  to  plan  revolt.  To 
the  Assyrian  monarch  as  to  the  Sultan  today,  the  main 
function  of  a  government  was  the.  levying  of  taxes,  and  the 
provinces  must  have  groaned  under  the  burden.  To  what 
extent  the  home  land  was  freed  we  do  not  know.  It  would 
appear  that  about  this  time  a  definite  budget  was  first  made 
out,  for  from  this  period  we  have  lists  of  tribute  due  from 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  1 6/ 

the  various  provinces  as  well  as  an  account  of  the  various 
objects  for  which  the  sums  were  to  be  appropriated.^*  While 
the  general  lines  of  provincial  administration  are  now  fairly 
known,  a  thorough  study  of  the  system  is  still  needed.^^ 

"  See  the  tribute  lists  published  by  Sayce,  Records  of  the  Past^  XL 
144.  Arpad  is  assessed  at  30  talents,  Carchemish  at  100,  Que  at  30, 
Megiddo  at  15,  and  Mannuguate  at  the  same.  The  amount  paid  by 
Cimirra,  Hatarakka,  Cubud,  Samalla,   is  lost. 

"  The  best  sketch  of  the  provincial  system  is  to  be  found  in  Maspero, 
Empires,  193  if.  What  is  needed  is  a  study  of  the  system  as  a  whole 
in  connection  with  a  history  of  the  provinces  somewhat  along  the  line 
of  Mommsen's  Provinces  of  the  Roman  Empire.  In  an  elaborate  work 
such  as  that  of  Maspero,  so  much  detail  in  regard  to  frontiers  is  given 
that  the  main  lines  of  Assyrian  development  are  obscured,  while  much 
of  the  effect  of  this  detail  is  lost  by  not  being  brought  into  connection 
with  other  pieces  of  detail  belonging  to  the  same  region.  The  studies 
of  Billerbeck  and  Streck,  for  example,  have  shown  how  valuable  for 
topography  is  such  a  course,  while  the  preceding  chapters  may  be  taken 
r.3  an  example  of  what  can  be  done  in  this  way  even  for  a  single  reign. 
It  is  necessary  for  our  proper  understanding  of  the  system  that  we 
know  how  far  it  was  based  on  those  of  the  Babylonians  or  even 
Egyptians,  while  even  more  important  is  the  question  as  to  how  far  it 
influenced  that  of  the  Persian  Empire  and  the  other  neighboring  govern- 
ments. Through  Persia,  the  Assyrian  system  influenced  Rome  and 
thus  the  mediaeval  and  modern  world,  for  Persia  to  the  Greek  political 
writers  represented  the  imperial  idea,  Persia  set  the  fashion  for  the 
Hellenistic  world  powers,  while  Rome,  already  an  unconscious  debtor 
to  the  first  Persian  empire,  consciously  imitated  the  second  in  the 
movement  which  changed  the  one  supreme  "  general  "  of  the  time  of 
Augustus  to  the  more  than  half  oriental  "  despot "  of  that  of  Diocletian. 
While  we  know  the  location  of  most  of  these  centers  of  government, 
we  do  not  know  their  boundaries  or  extent  nor  have  we  any  definite 
idea  of  the  exact  functions  of  the  governors.  Was  provincial  control 
divided  as  in  Persian  times?  A  list  of  the  governors, — based  naturally 
on  that  of  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  — ,  should  be  made  and  then  all  the  data 
in  places  where  they  are  mentioned  tested  to  see  if  it  can  be  utilized 
for  the  history  of  the  provinces.  The  history  of  these  in  general  end 
with  the  wars  needed  to  conquer  them  and  their  organization.  In 
many  cases  already  we  know  much  of  their  later  history  from  hints 
here  and  there  in  letters  and  documents.  I  intended  to  list  those 
occurring  in  the  reign  of  Sargon  but  hold  my  notes  until  they  are  more 


1 68  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

From  the  earliest  times  Babylonia  had  law  codes  and  an 
elaborate  legal  machinery,  caused  by  its  great  trading  inter- 
ests as  well  as  by  a  primitive  factory  system  operated  by 
slave  labor.  Assyria  was  less  of  a  trading  nation,  although 
there  must  have  been  some  traders,  and  commercial  motives 
can  be  traced  at  times  in  the  campaigns  of  the  reign.  As  a 
rule,  the  main  commercial  interest  of  such  an  expedition 
must  have  been  the  booty,  and  such  an  attitude  must  have 
had  as  evil  an  effect  on  the  development  of  the  real  resources 
of  the  country  as  the  influx  of  the  easily  won  American  gold 
had  on  Spain.  The  preceding  period  of  break-up  seems  to 
have  left  Assyrian  industry  in  a  bad  way,  and  we  hear  of 
decaying  villages  and  of  agricultural  apparatus  out  of  com- 
mission, even  the  canals,  so  absolutely  essential  for  the  wel- 
fare of  the  country,  being  no  longer  fit  to  be  used.  All  this, 
so  Sargon  boasts,  he  changed.  The  villages  he  rebuilt,  the 
canals  he  opened,  the  waters  he  stored,  were  a  real  blessing 
to  the  country,  as  was  the  bringing  of  new  sections  under 
cultivation.  But  he  clearly  did  not  understand  the  real 
issues.  The  decline  of  an  agricultural  population  was  no 
doubt  due  to  the  same  causes  which  operated  in  the  later 
Roman  republic.  With  this  came  finally  a  rise  in  prices, 
aided,  no  doubt,  by  the  large  amount  of  precious  metals 

complete.  An  important  question  which  has  long  troubled  me  is  to 
just  what  extent  there  was  a  real  difference  between  the  government 
of  Assyria,  of  the  personally  united  countries,  and  of  the  outer  ring 
of  provinces.  I  fear  the  real  difference  has  been  exaggerated,  though 
I  have  followed  the  current  view  fully  in  the  text.  Sargon  restored 
the  right  of  direct  government  by  the  crown  to  the  city  of  Ashur,  and 
there  was  change  enough  to  cause  the  governor  of  that  city  to  complain, 
yet  it  certainly  had  a  governor  who  was  eponym  in  716  (see  above). 
Babylon  certainly  was  highly  favored  yet  in  709  or  a  little  later.  While 
Sargon  was  still  in  Babylon,  we  find  its  governor  mentioned,  D.  140. 
Perhaps  then  after  all,  see  chap.  II.  n.  27,  we  have  no  right  to  assume 
that  the  governor  we  find  in  Harran  in  685  was  a  recent  infliction,  a 
result  of  an  anti-hierarchical  party. 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  1 69 

brought  in  by  the  successful  wars.  Sargon  naturally  felt 
this  to  be  due  to  conspiracy  on  the  part  of  the  Aramaean 
traders  in  whose  hands  was  now  the  greater  part  of  the 
trade  of  the  empire.  One  of  his  proudest  boasts  is  the  way 
he  made  a  tariff  so  that  the  necessities  of  life  might  be 
accessible  to  all,  wine  for  the  sick,  incense  for  the  joy  of 
the  heart,  oil  for  wounds,  while  sesame  was  the  same  price 
as  grain.^® 

The  immense  number  of  business  documents  from  Baby- 
lonia have  given  a  very  vivid  picture  of  the  social  life  there. 
Unfortunately,  we  are  practically  without  examples  of  ordi- 
nary Assyrian  trading  documents,  although  this  is  made 
partially  good  by  the  large  number  of  such  documents  com- 
ing from  the  court  itself.  Preceding  pages  have  shown  how 
these  occasionally  throw  a  gleam  of  light  on  the  history  and 
especially  on  the  great  personages  who  played  a  part  at 
court.  Here,  again,  the  number  actually  coming  from  this 
reign  is  small,  a  considerable  contrast  to  the  letters.  So  far 
as  we  can  see,  we  have  the  same  conditions  as  in  later  reigns. 
The  references  to  the  eponyms  or  to  other  governors  are 
often  of  value,  while  the  lists  of  witnesses  ranging  from  high 
officials  to  slaves  give  an  insight  into  the  composition  of  the 
social  system.^'^ 

"C.  34  if. 

"  All  previous  editions  of  the  Assyrian  business  documents  have 
been  superseded  by  that  of  Johns,  Deeds  and  Documents.  Thanks  to 
his  abandonment  of  the  chronological  system  and  the  study  of  each 
group  by  itself,  many  puzzles  are  being  solved.  Thus  far  he  has 
worked  up  only  about  a  third  of  his  published  material.  In  general, 
I  have  been  forced  to  confine  myself  to  this.  I  have  prepared  for 
myself  a  list  of  persons  occurring  in  Sargon's  reign  but  do  not  think  it 
worth  publishing  here.  The  documents  dated  in  Sargon's  reign  may 
be  seen  from  the  list  published  as  an  appendix  to  Johns,  Deeds,  vol. 
I,  where  all  the  data  bearing  on  the  eponym  list  are  collected.  The 
Louvre   has   a   certain   number   of   Sargon    documents.       Extracts    from 


I/O  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

Around  the  king  was  a  regular  official  hierarchy  with  a 
definite  arrangement  of  precedence.  Thanks  to  the  above- 
mentioned  documents,  we  are  now  beginning  to  understand 
something  of  their  work  and  of  their  rank,  but  much  still 
is  dark.  Below  them  were  the  freemen,  who  held  land  by 
the  bow,  the  feudal  obligation  to  fight  the  wars  of  their  lord. 
Probably  there  was  a  free  proletariat  as  well,  though  there 
seems  no  proof.  By  this  time  the  number  of  free  Assyrians 
must  have  grown  much  smaller.  To  the  free  population 
must  also  be  added  the  foreign  trader.  The  mass  of  the 
population  was  unfree,  slaves  or  serfs.  On  all  the  lands  of 
Assyria  were  these  serfs,  bound  to  the  soil  and  passing  to  a 
new  owner  with  it.  In  theory,  .the  position  of  the  serf  might 
seem  an  advance  on  that  of  the  slave.  In  practice,  the  serfs 
on  the  great  estates  which  the  king  had  granted  by  royal 
charter  to  his  favorite  nobles,  and  who  by  the  labor  of  their 
hands  made  the  garden  of  the  world  of  the  Babylonian 
swamps  and  the  Mesopotamian  steppes,  were  probably  in- 
ferior socially  as  well  as  mentally  to  the  city  slaves  who  were 
engaged  in  industry,  often  indeed  under  what  might  almost 
be  called  factory  conditions,  or  even  in  independent  trade, 
paying  a  sort  of  annual  tax  to  the  nominal  owner.  We  even 
find  one  slave  owning  another.  In  general,  slavery  was 
mild.  If  the  political  conditions  are  much  like  those  obtain- 
ing near  the  end  of  the  Roman  empire,  there  is  an  equally 
close  similarity  in  the  underlying  social  causes.  The  original 
nobility,  even  the  original  free  people,  was  dying  out,  for- 
eigners held  the  trade  and  even  important  government  posts. 
The  slaves  were  improving  their  condition,  at  least  in  the 
cities,  but  the  serfs,  the  representatives  partly  of  an  old  free 
agricultural  population,  perhaps  more,  in  both  cases,  of  the 

a   few   are   to   be   found   in    Strassmaier's    Verzeichniss.       There   is   not 
enough  distinctly  Sargonid  material  to  warrant  an  attempt  at  a  picture. 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  I /I 

gradually  rising-  body  of  slaves  on  the  great  estates,  to  which 
the  fewer  and  fewer  free  men  were  dragged  down  by  the 
competition  of  slave  labor.  There  is  certainly  a  sufficient 
amount  of  coincidence  here  to  make  the  study  of  both  agree- 
ments and  differences  as  well  as  of  the  underlying  causes, 
extremely  interesting.^^ 

Whatever  their  attitude  towards  other  lines  of  work,  the 
Assyrians  never  allowed  any  but  themselves  or  their  Baby- 
lonian teachers  to  hold  religious  offices.  With  their  usual 
ability  as  copyists,  they  took  over  the  whole  Babylonian  sys- 
tem with  its  pantheon  of  gods,  old  and  young,  its  demons, 
its  ritual  and  its  exorcisms  in  the  obsolete  Shumerian  tongue. 
Yet,  however  carefully  the  Assyrians  copied  Babylonian 
models,  Assyrian  religion  was  something  as  different  as  was 
the  altered  political  horizon  to  which  the  old  star  omens 
were  fitted.  Other  gods  might  have  their  cults,  but  the  real, 
the  national  god  of  Assyria,  whose  worship  sometimes  al- 
most reaches  monotheism,  was  Ashur,  "the  father  of  the 
gods,"  the  embodied  nation.  Sargon  was  brought  to  the 
throne  by  the  aid  of  the  priesthood  and  ever  honored  it. 
But  his  honor  was  especially  given  to  Ashur,  and  this  made 
him  a  good  patriot  and  an  ardent  soldier,  for  it  was  "  in  the 
might  of  Ashur  "  that  an  Assyrian  king  went  forth  to  battle 
and  each  newly  organized  province  was  at  once  given  its 
images  of  the  king  and  of  Ashur,  a  curious  anticipation  of 
the  provincial  worship  of  "  Rome  and  Augustus."  We  can 
better  understand  his  partiality  for  Ashur,  if  that  god  was 
his  patron  saint  from  whom  he  was  named,  for  it  has  been 
suggested  with  some  plausibility  that  his  name,  which  is 
incomplete  as  it  stands,  was  originally  Ashur  shar  ukin.^® 

"  This  sketch  is  based  on  the  data  brought  together  in  Johns,  Deeds. 
"  Peiser,  Mitth.  Vorderasiat.  Gesell.,  1900,  2,  50,  on  basis  of  numerical 
play,   C.  65. 


1/2  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

As  he  was  especially  interested  in  Harran,  he  naturally  cared 
for  its  patron,  Sin,  the  moon  god.  A  trace  of  this  is  surely 
to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  Sin  is  invoked  in  the  name  of 
his  son  Sennacherib.  As  suzerain  of  Babylon,  he  naturally 
would  also  pay  great  attention,  as  already  seen,  to  Bel  Mar- 
duk,  of  Babylon,  and  Nabu,  of  Borsippa,  as  well  as  to  their 
consorts  Zarpanit  and  Tashmit.  These  were  the  great  gods 
of  the  nation,  but  others  were  highly  honored.  The  new 
Dur  Sharrukin  was  to  hold,  in  addition  to  those  already  men- 
tioned, shrines  of  Ea,  the  old  water  god,  Shamash,  the  sun 
god  of  Sippar,  Adad,  the  thunderer,  and  Ninib  of  Kalhu,  as 
well  as  their  consorts.^^  Ishtar,  in  Assyria  rather  the  god- 
dess of  war  than  of  love,  was  rather  neglected  by  Sargon, 
though  one  of  the  gates  of  the  new  city  is  named  after  her 
and  we  hear  of  offerings  to  her.^^  We  also  have  a  hymn  to 
Nana  which  is  attributed  to  this  ruler.^^  Anu  and  Dagan  have 
a  very  prominent  part  in  the  invocations  opening  the  inscrip- 
tions, though  just  why  Sargon  was  the  "  man  "  of  these  gods 
and  not  of  Sin  when  he  freed  Harran  I  cannot  understand.^^ 
Other  gods  referred  to  are  Damqu  and  Shar  ilani,  the 
brother  gods  of  the  town  where  Dur  Sharrukin  was  built, 
and  Shaushepi,  a  Mitanian  goddess  settled  at  Nineveh.^* 
This  religious  character,  as  already  noted,  was  very  pleas- 
ing to  the  priestly  party,  and  Sargon's  reputation  was  made 
accordingly.  The  strongly  anti-hierarchical  reign  of  his 
son  Sennacherib  made  a  sharp  and  favorable  contrast,  so 
that,  when  once  more  the  religious  section  gained  control 

^D.  155. 

^^82-5-22,  90  (Catalogue). 

^  K.  3600,  Craig,  Relig.  Texts,  I.  54-55. 

^Cf.  chap.  II.  n.  27. 

^*  C.  53  if. — Shaushepi  is  thus  read  and  equated  with  the  Shaushbi 
of  the  Mitanian  Amarna  letter  by  Hommel,  Proc.  Soc.  Bibl.  Arch.,  1894, 
212. — K.  434  =  J.  336  refers  to  Sin  of  Dur  Sharrukin. 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  173 

under  Esarhaddon,  we  are  not  surprised  to  find  the  state- 
ment made  in  a  letter  to  the  king  that  there  has  been  no 
justice  in  the  land  since  the  days  of  Sargon.^^ 

In  religion  there  was  a  certain  tendency  to  following  the 
older  paths,  and  this  naturally  showed  itself  in  literature, 
or  at  least  in  that  branch  of  it  which  fell  under  priestly  con- 
trol. It  has  been  assumed  that,  because  nearly  all  our  liter- 
ary documents  were  found  in  the  palace  of  Ashur  bani  pal, 
the  copying  of  all  is  therefore  due  to  him.  I  do  not  see  how 
a  certain  element  of  truth  can  well  be  refused  to  this,  for  a 
large  number  bear  his  name  in  the  colophon.  But  the  fact 
that  so  large  a  number  of  the  letters  and  business  documents 
found  there  came  from  the  same  place,  and  yet  date  earlier, 
should  give  us  pause,  and  this  is  confirmed  by  what  few 
clues  we  are  able  to  discover.  Sargon  evidently  had  a 
library,  for  we  find  an  inscription  with  his  "  library  mark,"  ^^ 
and  perhaps  if  we  had  before  us  the  texts  cited  in  the  Cata- 
logue as  belonging  to  Sargon's  time  we  should  find  others. 
To  one  scholar  or  patron  of  scholars,  Nabu  zuqup  kini,  son 
of  Marduk  shum  iqisha,  whose  very  names,  compounded 
with  the  gods  interested  in  all  this  work,  show  their  position, 
we  owe  much,  for  already  some  fifteen  tablets  can  be 
definitely  ascribed  to  him,  while  others  of  the  same  sort  from 
this  reign  may  with  probability  be  attributed  to  the  same 
person.  The  most  important  of  the  old  works  he  caused  to 
be  copied  was  the  "  Illumination  of  Bel,"  whose  connection 

2"  K.  122  =:  H.  43  =  Van  Gelderen  IV  =  Johns,  Lmvs,  377-  The  letter 
is  from  Akullanu. — K.  304-=  J.  1077,  cf.  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  107,  lists 
temple  offerings  confirmed  by  Sargon  but  taken  away  under  Sennacherib 
by  Ludari  the  rab  MU  biti  of  Parakka  and  Simirra,  I.  18  ff.,  VIII.  17. 

^"This  is  K.  4818  which  Winckler  has  published  as  part  of  Prism 
B.  I  was  unable  to  utilize  it  for  my  reconstruction  of  that  document 
and  so  was  led  to  doubt  its  belonging  there.  The  subject  matter  is 
different  and,  so  far  as  I  can  tell  from  Winckler's  copy,  the  general 
mechanical  make  up  also. 


1/4  WESTERN   ASIA   IN    THE   DAYS  OF   SARGON 

with  the  elder  Sargon  we  have  already  noted.^^  Two  recen- 
sions of  this  are  known,  one  copied  in  Sargon's  time,  the 
other  in  the  days  of  Ashur  bani  pal.  Of  the  former,  seven 
tablets  have  thus  far  been  identified,^^  dating  from  716  to 
705.  Isolated  tablets  from  other  series  are  known  to  have 
been  copied  for  him,  astrological  forecasts,^^  observations  on 
the  moon,^^  star  observations,^^  prayers,^^  tablets  containing 
directions  for  the  cult.^^  A  number  of  other  tablets  can  be 
placed  in  this  reign.^'* 

We  have  already  seen  the  political  reasons  which  led  the 
scribes  of  Sargon  to  write  down  the  floating  legends  about 
the  elder  Sargon.^^  The  omen  list  is  as  dry  as  such  works 
are;  the  story  of  his  birth  and  early  life  is  probably  the 
finest  piece  of  literature  written  in  cuneiform,  simple  folk 
tale  though  it  is. 

The  most  characteristic  literature  of  the  Babylonians  was 
religious.  The  war  annals  gave  way  to  the  hymn  to  the 
god.  In  Assyria  the  greatest  importance  was  given  to  the 
display  of  the  king's  might  in  war,  but  nothing  has  as  yet 
been  found  comparing  at  all  with  the  wide  interests,  local 
and  chronological,  of  the  Babylonian  Chronicle.    In  general, 

^^  Chap.  II.  n.  2T. 

=*  These  are  Tablet  6,  K.  5281;  Tablet  36,  K.  10084  =  Craig  31; 
Tablet  41,  91-S-9,  97  =  Craig  35  ;  S.  930  =  Craig  48  ;  S.  854  =  Craig 
48;  S.  1070;  K.  5277,  of  unknown  tablets.  The  dates  are  not  in  order, 
for  tablet  6  was  made  in  706,  tablet  36  in  705,  tablet  41  in  716.  The 
last  seems  to  belong  to  a  still  earlier  set  of  copies.  Tablet  36  and 
S.  854,  930,  1070  were  written  for  or  b^  Nabu  zuqup  kani. 

"S.  98s;  81-2-4,  327;  K.  10967. 

*"  K.  1 1309  ;  11614. 

""K.  137. 

"  K.  9452  ;  Rm.  222. 

""K.  9487;  13839;  cf.  also  Rm.  155. 

"^K.  3092;  11618;  S.  2045;  2102;  D.  T.  318;  Rm.  399;  Rm.  2,  loi ; 
345  ;  80-7-19,  2^T,  83-1-18,  429. 

""See  chap.  II.  n.  18. 


THE   CULTURE   LIFE  I  75 

we  find  these  glorifications  of  the  king,  whether  confined  to 
mere  Hsts  of  titles  and  unmeaning  phrases,  or  supported  by 
the  great  deeds  he  claims  to  have  done,  a  little  dull  reading. 
And  yet  it  is  not  all  dull,  for  now  and  then  our  attention  is 
drawn  from  the  bare  data  to  some  picturesque  expression 
which  shows  us  we  have  still  to  do  with  the  race  which  pro- 
duced the  book  of  Job  and  the  Arabian  Nights.  In  the 
outlook  on  life  we  have  an  almost  Homeric  attitude,  that  of 
a  race  civilized,  but  not  yet  sophisticated.  Frequently  the 
similes  are  taken  from  nature.  Sargon  roars  like  a  lion, 
his  troops  rush  to  the  attack  like  eagles,  his  enemies  fly 
away  like  birds,  the  devastation  of  the  land  is  like  that 
caused  by  locusts.  Islands  lie  like  fish  in  the  sea.  Again 
there  are  similes  from  the  simple  life  round  about.  There 
are  often  references  to  the  yoke  laid  upon  the  enemy  or  of 
friends  who  loved  his  yoke.  Sibu  fled  away  like  an  unfaith- 
ful shepherd  abandoning  his  flocks.  The  destruction  is  so 
complete  that  the  remains  will  be  only  as  the  pottery  crushed 
to  powder  to  make  mortar.  The  Cypriotes  are  dragged  like 
fish  from  the  waters.  Picturesque  phrases  are  used.  Ru- 
sash  was  a  helper  who  could  not  help.  Iranzu  went  the 
"way  of  death,"  while  as  for  Dalta,  "his  fate  came  upon 
him."  Merodach  Baladan  was  an  evil  spirit.  Very  pic- 
turesque are  the  accounts  of  the  suicide  of  Rusash  and  the 
despair  of  Merodach  Baladan,  the  most  picturesque,  per- 
haps, because  the  scribe  was  not  fettered  in  the  flights  of  his 
imagination  by  facts.  The  frequent  formulae,  such  as  "  I 
pulled  down,  I  tore  up,  with  fire  I  burned,"  also  give  a  sort 
of  Homeric  touch.  Yet  perhaps  the  most  impressive  thing 
about  these  war  annals  is  the  straightforward  way  in  which 
events  are  described,  the  mode  of  narration  of  a  people 
which  feels  that  it  is  doing  great  deeds  and  needs  no  literary 
adornment  to  enhance  them. 


1/6  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

Of  all  the  arts,  architecture  is  most  closely  connected  with 
history  and  the  Assyrians  were  a  building  nation.  Partly 
this  was  caused  by  emulation  of  Babylonia,  where  ages  of 
construction  had  left  a  vast  heritage  of  noble  edifices, 
partly  by  the  wish  of  the  rulers  to  utilize  their  booty  in  erect- 
ing memorials  to  their  greatness,  partly  to  the  unsubstantial 
character  of  these  memorials,  which  were  constantly  falling 
into  disrepair  and  so  made  a  new  erection  almost  as  easy 
as  the  preparation  of  one  for  renewed  occupation.  Sargon 
was  a  true  Assyrian  in  this  respect.  In  the  provinces  he 
built  extensively  from  the  frontier  fort  to  the  palace  at  Car- 
chemish.  Hardly  a  city  was  captured  but  what  was  rebuilt, 
and  a  mere  catalogue  of  these  alone  would  give  an  im- 
pressive idea  of  his  building  operations. 

It  would  appear  that,  at  the  beginning  of  his  reign,  Sar- 
gon resided  at  the  city  of  Ashur  he  so  favored,^^  and  later 
we  know  that  the  palace  there  was  repaired  by  Tab  gil  esharra 
the  governor  of  that  city.^^  During  the  greater  part  of  the 
reign  the  royal  headquarters  were  at  Kalhu,  further  north, 
where  a  number  of  the  Assyrian  kings,  beginning  with 
Shalmaneser  I,  had  resided.  An  old  palace  of  Ashur  nagir 
pal  which  had  fallen  into  decay  was  restored  and  adorned 
with  the  booty  of  Carchemish.^^  As  late  as  707,  when  Sar- 
gon was  in  Babylon,  Sennacherib,  as  regent  of  Assyria,  still 
resided  in  Kalhu.^®  Nineveh  was  not  the  favored  city  it  be- 
came under  his  successors,  but  we  find  him  repairing  there 
a  temple  to  Nabu  and  Marduk  originally  erected  by  Adad 

^  A.  20,  e.  g.,  says  that  Hanunu  was  brought  to  "  my  city  of  Ashur." 
Note  also  that  Kalhu  seems  not  to  have  been  rebuilt  until  later. 
"  K.  620  =  H.  91  =:  van  Gelderen  XIV. 

"  The  Nimrud  inscription  deals  largely  with  this,  see  on  chap.  I. 
^*  See  last  chapter. 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  1/7 

nirari,  and  residence  for  a  time  here  seems  to  be  indicated."**^ 
at  Tarbig,  the  modern  Sherif  Khan,  a  palace  was  erected, 
later  repaired  by  Esarhaddon.''^  At  Karamles,  to  the  east  of 
Nineveh,  an  important  part  of  the  Assyrian  triangle,  Sargon 
followed  the  example  of  Shalmaneser  in  building.*^  The 
Assyrian  Chronicle  gives  the  restoration  of  two  temples,  one 
in  722-721,  the  other  in  719-714.  The  latter  was  a  Nergal 
temple,  and  seems  to  have  been  the  great  one  at  Kutha, 
which  probably  was  at  this  time  in  Sargon's  possession."*^ 
An  interesting  letter  is  one  from  Ishtar  Duri  forwarding  the 
complaint  of  Shamash  bel  ugur,  eponym  in  711,  who  is  at 
Der,  and  has  no  inscriptions  to  put  on  the  temple  at  that 
place.**  Again,  we  learn  that  the  palace  of  the  queen  at 
Kakzi  was  in  ruins.  The  king  was  asked  if  it  should  be 
repaired.*"  Evidently  Sargon  was  unable  to  execute  the 
work,  for  it  was  not  done  until  704,  a  year  after  his  death.*^ 
Thus  Sargon  was  much  engaged  in  building.  But  the 
production  of  such  comparatively  minor  works  did  not 
satisfy  him.  The  elder  Sargon  had  had  his  city  of  Dur 
Sharrukin  named  after  him  and  he  would  do  likewise.*' 

*"  See  the  Nineveh  bricks,  Winckler,  Sargon,  I.  195.  The  deed  of 
gift  of  714  is  dated  at  Nineveh,  and  the  Prisms  seems  to  have  come  from 
the   same  place. 

*^  Esarhaddon  in  I.  R.  48,  5,  6,  8,  claims  this  for  himself. 

*- Place,  Ninive,  II.  169. 

"  Rm.  2,  97,  cf.  chap.  I.  n.  45. 

**  K.   504  =  H.   157  =  Johnston,  in  Harper,  Literature,  253   /. 

^''S.  1034  =:H.  389;  G.  Smith,  Assys.  Disc,  414;  S.  A.  Smith,  Proc. 
Soc.  Bibl.  Arch.,  IX.  245  ;  Delitzsch,  Beitr.  z.  Assys.,  I.  613  ff. 

*«  II.  R.  69. 

"  Each  of  the  inscriptions  of  the  group  written  about  707  ends  with 
a  somewhat  similar  account  of  the  Dur  Sharrukin  operations,  and  the 
shorter  are  largely  devoted  to  it.  The  fullest  is  in  the  Cylinder  which, 
however,  has  a  clear  literary  dependence  on  the  deed  of  gift,  see  below, 
dating  from  713.  The  description  of  the  city,  as  it  is  to-day,  is  largely 
based   on  the  discussion  of   Place  in  his  Ninive.      His   excavations  of 


178  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

Looking  around,  he  found  an  appropriate  locality  at  Mag- 
ganuba,  a  half-ruined  town  to  the  northeast  of  Nineveh,"*^  at 
the  foot  of  the  barren  Musri  hills.  The  soil  around  was 
largely  clay,  providing  a  good  and  cheap  building  material. 
The  ground  was  fertile, — at  present  two  crops  of  cereals 
are  raised  each  year  and  a  large  part  exported  to  Baghdad. 
Trees  grew  there  then  and  from  the  sculptures  we  learn 
of  palms,  olives,  figs,  and  oranges  in  this  region.  The 
waters  are  medicinal,  being  strongly  charged  with  sulphur, 
and  this  may  have  had  something  to  do  with  the  old  king's 
choice  of  a  site.^^ 

We  are  fortunate  in  having  several  copies  of  the  act  of 
expropriation  and  of  compensation  which  was  given  at 
Nineveh,  thus,  for  a  time  at  least,  the  seat  of  the  court,  in 
Simanu,  711.  The  land  required  for  the  new  city  was  not 
taken  without  compensation.  Those  who  wished  it  were 
paid  in  cash  the  price  their  estates  had  cost  them,  as  proved 
by  the  tablets  relating  to  the  purchase.  Those  who  preferred 
lands  were  given  them  in  other  parts  of  the  country.  To  the 
latter  type  belong  our  documents.  Adad  nirari  had  granted 
one  of  these  fields  to  three  men,  lanuni,  Ahu  lamur,  and 
Mannuki  Abi.  They  were  to  hold  it  on  very  easy  terms, 
merely  a  payment  of  ten  homers  of  barley  to  Ashur  and 
Bau.  Now  Mannuki  Abi,  who  was  still  alive,  and  the 
children  of  the  others  were  granted  in  exchange  ninety-five 
homers  of  land  in  a  priestly  city  near  Nineveh  for  the  same 

this  city  was  the  most  thorough  thus  far  undertaken.  Perrot  and 
Chipiez  in  their  History  of  Art  have  elucidated  some  points  and  a  good 
sketch  may  be  seen  in  Maspero,  Empires,  260  if.  For  the  earlier  Dur 
Sharrukin,  see  chap.  II.  n.  11. 

*'  In  the  707  group,  the  name  Magganuba  occurs  only  in  C.  44.  It 
also  occurs  in  the  deed  of  gift.  The  name  Maganubba  is  still  used  in 
694,  K.  346  =  Johns  427. 

*°  Place,  Ninive,  13  /. 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  1/9 

consideration,  and  this  was  to  hold  for  their  descendants."^^ 
The  city  which,  with  the  palace,  was  probably  the  work  of 
Tab  shar  Ashur,  the  chief  architect,^^  was  laid  out  in  the 
form  of  a  rough  rectangle,  nearly  two  thousand  yards  long  on 
each  side,  and  was  approximately  oriented  with  its  corners 
to  the  cardinal  points,  a  proceeding  no  doubt  due  to  a 
wish  not  to  receive  too  directly  the  blazing  summer  sun."'^ 
The  city  was  led  up  to  by  a  roughly  paved  road  forty  feet 
wide,  a  very  respectable  width  for  the  east,  and  was  con- 
tinued beyond  the  gate  with  the  same  dimensions.  On  one 
side  of  the  road  was  a  half  circle  and  a  stele,  evidently  a 
milestone. ^^  Around  the  whole  rectangle  was  a  high  wall 
with  its  base  of  rubble  work  between  two  stone  facings, 
while  the  upper  portion  of  doubtful  height  was  merely  of 
unbaked  bricks.^*  Owing  to  the  poor  building  material, 
these  walls  were  enormously  thick,  over  eighty  feet.^^  Along 
the  walls  were  over  one  hundred  and  fifty  towers,  while  they 
were  pierced  by  eight  gates,  named,  as  Sargon  tells  us,  after 
eight  great  Assyrian  deities.^*'  Three  were  used  for  vehicles. 
Huge  winged  bulls  with  human  heads  guarded  the  entrances, 
above  the  arch  were  enameled  bricks,  while  more  within 
were  the  slabs  carved  with  the  figures  bearing  pine  cone 

^  Of  this  document,  four  copies,  K.  1989;  4467;  83-1-18,  425; 
91-5-9,  193,  published  Winckler,  Sammlung,  II.  5  ;  Johns  660,  714,  809. 
A  translation  and  discussion,  Meissner,  Mitth.  Vorderasiat.  Gesell.,  1903, 
3.  Another  document  of  this  sort  is  Sargon  12,  45  of  the  Louvre,  col- 
lected as  J.  1 155  by  Johns  from  the  extracts  in  Strassmaier,  Verzeich- 
niss.  It  is  a  sale  of  the  land  of  the  king's  scribe  and  probably  is  to  be 
taken  in  connection  with  the  building  operations,  as  the  land  is  at  or 
near  Dur  Sharrukin,  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  xiv. 

^^  Eponym,  717. 

'2  Place,  18. 

'''Place,  196. 

"Place,   160   ff. 

''^  Place,    162. 

^"C.  66   ff. 


l80  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

and  basket.  Under  each  gate,  on  a  bed  of  sand,  was  hidden 
away  a  large  number  of  cheap  trinkets,  amulets  and  the  like, 
while  above  the  roof  was  vaulted  with  crude  bricks,  a  piece 
of  work  calling  for  no  small  skill.  Here  the  peasants  would 
pour  in  with  their  produce  or  sell  it  in  the  cool  halls,  the 
vender  of  cooling  drinks  or  of  sweetmeats  would  be  there, 
inquisitive  citizens  would  congregate  here  to  learn  the  latest 
news  from  the  front  or  the  latest  court  gossip.  Here,  too, 
were  soldiers,  and  here  the  judge  sat,  ready  to  expose  a 
captive  to  the  jeers  of  the  mob,  caged  with  the  wild  beasts, 
or  to  consign  him  to  a  lightless  prison  hole  sunk  in  the  midst 
of  the  wall.  In  some  gates,  steps  in  the  middle  prevented 
the  passage  of  horses  or  vehicles.  The  unfinished  state  of 
the  city  is  clearly  shown  at  one  gate  where  there  are  no  bulls, 
and  the  inscription  is  merely  painted.^" 

Little  has  been  preserved  of  the  city  itself.  Its  long 
straight  streets  crossing  at  right  angles  must  have  seemed 
very  strange  to  those  accustomed  to  the  narrow  tortuous  lanes 
common  to  the  older  cities.  They  were  paved  but  had  no 
sidewalks.  In  general,  the  effect  must  have  been  very 
monotonous,  with  the  long  straight  staring  brick  walls  with 
hardly  a  break  for  window  or  door.  Once  inside,  there  must 
have  been  more  life  in  the  courts,  perhaps  even  gardens, 
but  the  whole  probably  had  a  decided  ''  made  to  order  at 
short  notice  "  appearance.  There  must  have  been  bazaars, 
temples,  and  other  such  buildings,  but  we  have  few  traces.^^ 
The  one  reason  for  the  existence  of  the  city  and  the  one 
survival  of  importance  was  the  palace.  This  was  erected  on 
a  platform  situated  on  the  line  of  the  west  wall  and  extended 
partially  outside.  This  platform  was  no  doubt  erected  pri- 
marily in  imitation  of  Babylonian  models,  but  had  a  more 

"Place,  170  ff. 
'*  Place,  201   if. 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  l8l 

practical  justification.  It  not  only  formed  the  part  of  the 
city  most  difficult  for  an  enemy  to  conquer,  it  was  also  a 
refuge  from  a  revolt  which  might  be  feared  from  the  heter- 
ogeneous collection  of  captives  who  were  settled  here,  if 
the  little  body  of  native  Assyrians  in  the  city  could  not  con- 
trol them.^^  The  huge  mass  was  not  a  mere  lump  of  earth, 
but  was  erected  of  carefully  prepared  crude  bricks  with  a 
well-executed  drainage  system.  The  pressure  of  this  enor- 
mous body  was  resisted  by  a  retaining  wall  of  huge  well- 
dressed  stones,  some  of  which  weighed  over  twenty  tons, 
laid  with  mathematical  regularity.  Around  the  top  ran  a 
parapet.^^  How  the  platform  was  ascended  we  do  not  knov^_ 
but  probably  there  was  access  on  at  least  the  city  side  where 
ramp  and  perhaps  steps  were  used.^^ 

On  this  platform  was  a  series  of  buildings,  enough  to  hold 
the  population  of  a  small  town,  with  its  fourteen  courts  and 
eighty-seven  rooms.^^  It  was  divided  into  four  sections,  de- 
voted to  servants,  to  officials,  to  priests,  and  to  the  women, 
and  each  of  these,  with  its  main  court,  was  subdivided  into 

''  C.  72  if. 

«*  Place,  24  if. 

"^  There  is  no  reason  but  general  probability  for  the  system  of  access 
shown  by  Thomas  in  his  restoration,  Place,  pi.  18.  As  the  great  court 
would  have  held  the  chariots,  and  the  stables  were  nearby,  I  think  it 
more  probable  that  the  chariot  ramp  was  on  the  southeast,  not  the 
northeast  side.  A  decided  objection  to  the  placing,  with  Thomas,  of  the 
ramp  on  the  northeast  side  is  that  it  violates  a  principle  of  ancient  de- 
fensive warfare,  the  placing  of  a  ramp  so  that  the  right  side,  unpro- 
tected by  a  shield,  should  be  exposed  to  attack  from  the  walls.  I  am 
inclined  to  believe  that  the  only  city  entrance  was  at  the  southeast  and 
was  a  ramp.  But  are  we  forced  to  deny  an  outside  entrance?  Thomas' 
restoration  does  not  give  an  adequate  approach  to  the  royal  appartments. 
Such  a  one  would  be  given  by  a  ramp,  or  perhaps  here  better  steps,  in 
front  of  the  royal  courtyards.  As  a  ramp  would  naturally  go  up  towards 
the  city  wall,  the  rule  mentioned  above  would  be  followed. 

«2  Place,  45. 


1 82  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS    OF    SARGON 

various  groups,  each  again  around  its  central  court.  There 
were  two  main  entrances,  each  seeming  to  correspond  to  an 
ascent.  One  was  on  the  side  facing  the  city  and  was  on  the 
style  of  the  city  gates,  but  more  elaborate.  The  center  gate- 
way, flanked  by  its  great  bulls  and  adorned  with  tiling,  was 
reserved  for  the  monarch,  while  side  doors  admitted  the  ser- 
vants. This  led  into  a  large  court,  the  main  court  of  the 
palace  attendants.  Around  it  were  store  rooms,  each  with  a 
little  cell  for  its  keeper.  In  them  were  jars,  iron  imple- 
ments, and  other  supplies,  while  perhaps  some  held  the 
treasure.  Foodstuffs  and  drinkables  were  kept  in  other 
rooms  in  jars  whose  pointed  ends  were  placed  in  supports. 
A  sudden  shower  showed  to  astonished  workmen  wine  in 
some  of  these  jars  more  than  twenty-five  centuries  old. 
Nearby  were  the  kitchens  where  cooking  was  carried  on 
under  nearly  the  same  conditions  as  today.  Jars  were  turned 
on  one  side  and  arranged  in  rows.  In  these  was  put  the  fire, 
while  the  bread  was  plastered  upon  the  outside  and  thus 
baked.  Nearby  were  the  stables  and  the  open  courts  where 
the  horses  were  hobbled  to  rings  in  the  stone  pavement.  The 
procuring  of  these  horses  for  the  royal  stables  was  an  im- 
portant matter,  and  many  are  the  letters  relating  to  it. 
Two  main  sources  of  supply  existed.  One  was  Media, 
whence  later  the  famous  Nissaean  horses  came,  the  other 
was  Asia  Minor,  where,  on  the  Cappadocian  plains,  a  small 
but  sturdy  breed  was  raised.  Worthy  of  special  boast  were 
the  *'  great  horses  from  Egypt."  At  this  time  it  would  ap- 
pear the  keeper  of  the  royal  stables  was  Nergal  etir.^^ 

^  Place,  79  if.  A  considerable  number  of  letters  dealing  with  the 
horse  trade  have  been  published.  The  main  gain  is  in  topography.  The 
letters  of  Nergal  etir  are  not  in  the  same  form  as  the  later  ones.  K. 
560  =  H.  227  is  the  one  referring  to  Delta ;  K.  526  =  H.  226  =  De- 
litsch,  Beitr.  z.  Assys.,  I.  202,  reports  the  bringing  in  of  horses  by  a 
member  of  the  body  guard;  little  remains  of  K.  1228  =  H.  229  and  K. 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  I  83 

The  servants'  section  was  almost  competely  shut  off  from 
the  official  quarters.  The  entrance  to  the  latter  was,  if  our 
conjecture  be  right,  probably  from  outside  the  city  wall. 
Entering  probably  through  a  still  more  magnificent  gate- 
way, now  entirely  lost,  one  came  into  a  court  smaller  than 
that  of  the  servants  and  adorned  in  the  same  style  but  more 
richly.  Around  this  were  the  rooms  of  the  officials,  each 
with  its  broad  frieze  of  sculpture,  while  the  king  and  his 
personal  attendants  lived  in  simple,  unadorned  apartments 
near  the  center  of  the  platform  and  retired  as  much  as  pos- 
sible.*^* Here  dwelt  and  worked  the  officials  whom  the  let- 
ters and  documents  have  made  known  to  us. 

Skirting  along  the  wall  to  the  southwest,  one  came  to  the 
harem,  where  resided  the  ladies  of  the  palace.  Its  entrance 
was  guarded  by  two  doors,  placed  at  right  angles  so  as  to 
prevent  even  a  glimpse  by  the  passerby  of  the  interior. 
Once  inside,  there  was  a  servants'  court,  a  court  for  state 
purposes  with  a  statue  in  the  center,  with  figures  of  men  with 
slabs  on  their  heads,  perhaps  intended  to  bear  an  awning, 
with  rich  tiling,  and  finally  with  three  elaborate  rooms, 
where  probably  the  king  made  his  visits  in  state  to  each  of 
his  wives.  In  addition,  there  were  three  separate  suites  of 
rooms,  each  around  its  own  court  and  entirely  isolated  from 
the  others.  These  were  clearly  for  the  queens.  Two  opened 
on  the  state  court  and  seem  to  have  belonged  to  Sargon's 
wives.     The  third  opened  directly  on  the  servant's  court. 

1894  =:H.  230.  K.  1055  =  H.  228  seems  to  belong  to  another  man  o£ 
the  same  name.  For  the  great  horses  of  Egypt,  see  A.  440  and  the  dis- 
cussion on  the  Mugri  question.  The  horses  of  Asia  Minor  are  dis- 
tinctly small,  as  Professor  Sterrett  assures  me,  though  they  have  a  fine 
reputation  as  roadsters.  Tab  gil  esharra  was  also  engaged  in  the  horse 
trade.  In  K.  4770  =  H.  97  he  reports  horses  from  Bar  Halzi  and  in 
rC.  5465  =  H.  98  states  that  he  has  sent  a  messenger  for  horses  as  per 
orders. 

«*  Place,  45  ff. 


184  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE    DAYS   OF    SARGON 

This  would  seem  to  be  the  place  for  the  king's  daughter-in- 
law,  the  wife  of  Sennacherib.  This  was  a  lady  named 
Naqi'a,  apparently  from  Harran,  who  also  bore  the  Assyrian 
name  of  Zakutu  or  ''  Freed,"  a  reference  then  to  her  father- 
in-law's  kindness  to  her  native  city.  Both  as  wife  of  Sen- 
nacherib and  as  mother  of  Esarhaddon  she  played  a  large 
part,  with  cities  under  her  control,  a  large  staff,  and  consid- 
erable influence  on  the  course  of  affairs.^^ 

The  fourth  quarter  of  the  palace  enclosure  was  devoted  to 
the  priesthood.  Here  was  the  ziggurat,  a  solid  mass  of  brick 
nearly  one  hundred  and  fifty  feet  high.  Around  it  ran  a 
ramp  with  easy  ascent  and  on  its  top  were  two  altars  on 
which  sacrifice  was  offered  to  the  gods.*'®  With  its  varied 
colors, — each  of  the  seven  stories  bore  the  color  of  the  planet 
to  which  it  was  dedicated, — and  its  lofty  height,  it  must  have 
been  a  most  imposing  spectacle.  Nearby  was  a  temple 
adorned  with  reliefs  in  basalt,  but  never  finished,  and  other 
buildings  nearby  seem  to  represent  the  private  rooms  of  the 
priests.®^  Here  were  the  astrologers,  the  physicians,  and  no 
doubt  many  of  the  scribes.  An  interesting  example  of  a 
medical  test  comes  to  us  from  this  reign.  Ishtar  duri,  gover- 
nor of  Arapha,  sends  on  to  the  king  the  two  physicians, 
Nabu  shum  iddin  and  Nabu  erba,  of  whom  he  has  spoken. 
They  know  nothing  of  the  real  state  of  affairs  and  are  evi- 
dently to  have  their  knowledge  tested.®^ 

We  cannot  but  express  our  admiration  for  the  architects 

''"The  main  source  for  Naqi'a  is  82-5-22,  90=  J.  645.  See  also 
Meissner,  Mitth.  Vorderasiat.  GeselL,  1903,  3,  12  ff.;  Johns,  Deeds,  II. 
164  ;  Laws,  370  if. 

®^  One  of  these  altars  was  left  in  the  trenches.  It  seems  to  be  the 
one  seen  by  Professor  Sterrett's  party. 

«^  Place,   137  if. 

^K.  504  =:H.  157,  Johnston,  in  Harper,  Literature,  253  /.  Several 
astrologers  with  names  similar  to  men  from  the  reign  are  known,  but  I 
think  that  other  evidence  places  them  later. 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  1 85 

who  produced  such  splendid  results  from  such  poor  building 
material.  All  around  were  mountains  where  building  stone 
might  be  obtained,  and  we  may  wonder  why  this,  though 
not  of  a  very  high  quality,  was  not  used.  But  the  Assyrian 
architects  had  their  reasons.  The  country  north  of  the  Per- 
sian Gulf,  even  so  far  as  Assyria,  is  exposed  to  terrible 
heats  in  summer,  while  in  winter  the  winds  come  from  the 
snow-capped  mountains  nearby.  In  summer,  clay  was  even 
cooler  than  stone,  while  it  had  a  warmth  in  winter  never  to 
be  expected  from  the  houses  of  the  other  material.  Each 
king  wished  to  build  for  himself,  and  the  use  of  crude  clay 
offered  the  quickest  means,  while  its  simplicity  made  it 
possible  to  utilize  the  gangs  of  prisoners  from  the  foreign 
conquests. ^^  Nor  were  the  architects  lacking  in  skill.  Their 
bricks  were  fine  and  large,  and  as  no  mortar  was  used,  the 
mass  was  homogeneous  and  there  was  no  danger  of  set- 
tling."^^  The  great  danger  was  from  the  rains.  To  obviate 
this,  all  courts  were  paved  with  a  double  pavement  of  bricks 
and  with  a  thick  bed  of  bitumen  between,  while  elaborate 
drains  cut  through  the  platform  conducted  the  water  outside, 
and  at  the  same  time  connected  with  an  admirable  sewer 
system,  the  like  of  which  would  be  a  great  blessing  to  the 
greater  part  of  the  East  today. "^^  They  understood  the  pres- 
sure of  the  material  they  dealt  with  and  made  the  walls 
thick  enough  to  correspond.  To  us,  with  whom  sunlight  is  a 
necessity  and  whose  work  is  so  largely  indoors,  the  buildings 
seem  inadequately  lighted  by  the  doors  opening  into  the 
courts  and  by  the  terracotta  fixtures  in  the  roof.  But  the 
Assyrian  spent  the  most  of  his  time  in  the  open  air,  and 
when  he  did  go  inside  he  wished  darkness  and  coolness, 

«»  Place,  222  if. 

'"  Place,  243. 

"  Place,  295  if. ;  269. 


1 86  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

and  probably  spent  the  most  of  his  time  indoors  in  sleep. "^^ 
In  the  evening,  he  would  sleep  on  the  flat  roofs,  whose  dirt 
roof  was  kept  in  smooth  shape  by  the  stone  rollers  so  nu- 
merous in  the  ruins.  But  flat  roofs  were  not  all,  for  the 
architect  had  a  really  marvelous  control  over  the  arch  and 
vault.  The  use  of  unbaked  bricks  to  form  a  vault  which 
could  remain  to  our  day  shows  a  high  degree  of  abilitv,  as 
does  the  use  of  the  half  dome  in  the  same  crude  material 
for  the  courts  and  the  formation  of  the  vault  by  the  gradual 
change  of  the  bricks  from  the  square  walls. '^^ 

It  is  in  connection  with  the  city  of  Dur  Sharrukin  that  we 
are  enabled  to  study  the  art  of  the  period.  The  troublous 
times  preceding  that  of  Tiglath  Pileser  III  had  almost  ruined 
the  artistic  ability  of  the  nation.  But  the  reign  of  that 
monarch  marked  a  change  for  the  better,  and  with  each  suc- 
ceeding reign  there  was  a  distinct  advance,  although  this 
was  little  after  Sargon."^*  The  value  of  the  sculptures  for 
the  life  of  the  people  is  immense  and  has  been  fully  appre- 
ciated, but  they  deserve  study  from  a  purely  artistic  stand- 
point. The  Assyrians  rarely  sculptured  in  the  round,  but  a 
good  example  may  be  seen  in  the  standing  figure  with  a 
plinth  on  his  head  who  perhaps  supported  something."'^ 
Very  impressive  are  the  huge  winged,  man-headed  bulls,  of 
which  twenty-six  were  found  here,  weighing  over  forty  tons 
each."^^  Only  fineness  of  finish  could  be  gained  here,  for 
the  general  outline,  even  to  the  fifth  leg,  were  ordained  by 
the  canons  of  art. 

"Place,  315. 

"Place,  291   if.;  256. 

^*  Maspero,  Empires,  314  ff.,  well  points  out  these  changes  in  art. 
But  the  remarks  on  the  differences  between  the  art  of  Sargon's  and  of 
Sennacherib's  reign  should  be  read  with  caution,  for  it  is  very  probable 
that  many  of  the  sculptures  in  the  latter's  palace  really  came  from  Dur 
Sharrukin,  Place,  II.  92. 

"  Place,  122. 

"Place,  231. 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  1 8/ 

Art  found  its  highest  and  freest  expression  in  the  bas- 
reliefs  which  extended  in  long  rows,  a  mile  in  all,"  along  the 
walls  of  the  main  rooms  in  the  palace.  The  beauty  of  these, 
whether  showing  the  detail  of  a  campaign  or  the  more  peace- 
ful avocations  of  the  chase,  is  very  marked.  Sargon's  sculp- 
tors tried  a  new  experiment  in  using  basalt  instead  of  the  too 
soft  alabaster.  Before  many  slabs  had  been  cut,  the  work 
was  broken  off  and  the  workshop  with  its  partially  dressed 
slabs  left  to  be  discovered  in  our  own  days."^^  In  accordance 
with  the  usual  ancient  rule,  vivid  colors  were  used  to  bring 
out  the  details.'^ 

Painting  was  also  used  for  inscriptions  and  for  frescoes. 
Unfortunately,  the  fact  that  they  were  painted  on  the  crude 
walls  has  rendered  their  preservation  almost  impossible,  but 
many  traces  of  them  have  been  seen  and  one  or  two  frag- 
ments give  us  an  idea  of  an  art  which  seems  inferior  to  that 
displayed  on  those  bas-reliefs  where  the  artist  lavished  his 
best  efforts. ^^ 

Far  more  beautiful  was  the  work  in  tiling,  always  a 
specialty  of  the  east,  some  of  whose  finest  specimens  have 
been  found  in  the  palace  of  Sargon.  On  the  gates  w^e  have 
courses  of  enameled  bricks  where  winged  figures  with  the 
mystic  pine  cone  and  basket  face  each  other  across  a  circu- 
lar ornament,  perhaps  the  sun.  The  whole  is  included  within 
rows  of  conventionalized  white  and  yellow  daisies.  Other 
friezes  of  tiles  show  conventionalized  but  vigorous  lions, 
bulls,  or  eagles,  while  a  rude  fig  tree  and  a  curious  plow,  a 
great  contrast  to  the  simple  one  of  today,  are  also  found. 
But  the  most  interesting  are  those  from  the  harem,  where  the 

"  Place,  II.  69. 
'*  Place,  149,  93. 
"Place,  11.  82. 
«»  Place,  II.  80  fF. 


1 88  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

king  and  his  tartan,  Ashur  danin  igka,  are  represented.  The 
king  is  dressed  in  a  fringed  blanket  and  a  sort  of  jacket,  open 
in  front  and  leaving  the  right  hand  free,  while  the  left  is 
held  in  a  sort  of  sling.  His  right  hand  is  raised  as  if  giving 
orders,  his  left  holds  the  golden  scepter,  a  survival  of  the 
rude  wooden  knobbed  stick  still  used  by  the  peasantry.  On 
his  head  he  wears  a  golden  tiara  studded  with  jewels,  much 
like  the  modern  fez,  but  with  a  stiff  point  instead  of  the 
tassel.  At  the  back,  a  sort  of  shawl  falls  nearly  to  his  waist. 
On  his  feet  are  low  jeweled  sandals  with  toe  thong.  The 
forehead  is  good,  but  the  broad  lips,  pronounced  nose,  large 
ears,  and  thick  neck  seem  to  show  a  certain  coarseness.  His 
mustache  is  scanty,  but  a  square-cut  beard  falls  to  his  breast. 
His  tartan,  or  prime  minister,  is  dressed  much  like  the  king, 
save  for  his  bare  head.  He  looks  older  and  wears  a  longer 
beard.  He  seems  to  rest  on  a  spear  whose  point  touches  the 
ground.  A  careful  study  of  these  figures  seems  to  indicate 
that  we  have  here  actual  likenesses  and  very  good  ones.^^ 

The  pottery  was  of  an  advanced  type.  In  one  of  the 
store  rooms  was  found  a  large  quantity  of  jars,  one  inside 
the  other,  and  ranging  from  pithoi  four  feet  high  to  pip- 
kins.^2  But  the  Assyrians  did  not  need  do  their  best  with 
pottery,  for  alabaster  could  be  used  for  the  more  beautiful 
vessels,  while  the  Phoenician  invention  of  glass  was  also 
utilized.  One  beautiful  and  elaborate  glass  bottle  was  found 
in  one  of  the  store  rooms,  the  sole  unbroken  survival  of  a 

^'  Place,  pi.  27,  28. 

^^^  Place,  82.  In  spite  of  the  large  quantities  of  pottery  which  might 
have  been  utilized,  we  still  know  all  too  little  about  Assyrian  ceramics. 
As  regards  pottery  strata,  really  scientific  work  of  the  sort  carried  on 
in  Egypt,  Syria,  or  Greece,  is  still  to  be  undertaken.  This  is,  to  be 
sure,  partially  to  be  excused  by  the  fact  that  bricks  can  be  and  are 
used  for  dating,  but  it  is  still  unfortunately  true  that  the  archaelogy  of 
minor  articles  is  in  a  more  unsatisfactory  condition  than  in  other  fields 
of  research. 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  I  89 

large  collection,^^  while  a  fine  one  with  Sargon's  name  cut 
in  it  was  found  at  Kalhu.^*  Gem  engraving  was  also  still 
carried  on,  as  the  specimens  found  under  the  gates  testify.^" 

To  the  classical  writers,  the  Armenian  tribes  were  cele- 
brated for  their  metal  working,  but  they  probably  gained 
all  their  knowledge  from  the  Assyrians.  Copper  was  em- 
ployed alone,^*^  although  more  often  as  bronze.  The  frag- 
ments of  bronze  reliefs  from  the  harem,  probably  used  as 
facing  on  a  wooden  door,  make  us  regret  the  loss  of  a  second 
Balawat  gate  set  of  reliefs,^'  while  the  bronze  lions  found 
at  Dur  Sharrukin  and  at  Kalhu,  give  an  excellent  impression 
as  to  the  ability  of  the  Assyrians  in  moulding  and  casting. 
These  lions,  inscribed  in  both  Assyrian  and  Aramaic,  show 
us  the  exact  weights  used  in  the  Assyrian  metrology.  They 
also  show  another  very  interesting  fact.  The  Assyrians  had 
taken  the  heavy  mina,  while  Babylonia  and  Syria  preferred 
the  light  or  Carchemish  mina.  The  other  kings  simply  toler- 
ated this  light  mina,  but  Sargon,  the  conqueror  of  Carche- 
mish, made  it  "  royal "  or  official,  no  doubt  in  the  hope  of 
removing  obstacles  to  trade  between  Assyria  and  the  West.^^ 

The  Assyrians,  well  as  they  handled  copper  and  bronze, 
had  long  ago  entered  the  iron  age  and  it  was  no  doubt  to 
no  small  degree  due  to  this  use  of  iron  both  in  peace  and  in 
war  that  the  success  of  Assyria  was  so  marked.^^  How 
much  iron  was  used  can  be  surmised  from  the  fact  that  one 

^  Place,  56. 

**  Layard,  Nineveh  and  Babylon. 

"»  Place,  189. 

««  Place,  89. 

«^  Place,  314. 

^  For  the  Khorsabad  lion,  see  Maspero,  Empires,  266.  For  those 
from  Kalhu,  Layard,  Nineveh,  1.  128.  Best  published  in  Corpus.  Ins. 
Semit.,  II.  8,  9,  13.     Best  discussion  by  Johns,  Deeds,  II.  256  if. 

»»  Place.  88. 


190  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE   DAYS   OF    SARGON 

Store  room  at  Dtir  Sharrukin  had  stored  away  in  it  nearly 
two  hundred  tons  of  iron,  all  worked  up  in  the  forms  of 
implements.  Among  these  was  a  huge  iron  chain,  ham- 
mers, pickaxes,  mattocks,  and  plowshare  uf  the  same  sort 
as  used  by  the  modern  natives  but  of  a  larger  size, — some 
of  the  picks  weighed  over  twenty-five  pounds, — and  of  a 
finer  quality,  the  peculiar  resonance  being  especially  noted.®** 
No  doubt  there  were  also  many  fine  pieces  produced  in  the 
precious  metals,  but  these  have  naturally  long  ago  gone  into 
the  melting  pot. 

The  work  of  building  Dur  Sharrukin,  rush  it  as  the  offi- 
cials might  try,  was  slow,  and  we  have  letters  in  regard  to 
its  construction.  One,  for  example,  comes  from  Sha  Ashur 
dubbu,  of  Tushhan,  who  reports  that  his  men  are  now  at 
Dur  Sharrukin,  and  asks  that  other  officials  help  him  guard 
the  timber  until  it  is  removed  thither.®^  Every  campaign 
brought  its  quota  of  spoil  for  the  new  city.®^  At  last  the 
palace  was  ready,  at  least,  so  it  was  decided,  and  the  dedica- 
tion took  place,  probably  in  706.®^    This  was  celebrated  by 

"^  Place,  84  ff. 

"  K.  469  =  H.  138,  Johnston,  Jour.  Amer.  Orient.  Soc,  1897,  159  /. 
=:  Harper,  Literature,  247.  There  is  a  good  plenty  of  letters  referring 
to  Dur  Sharrukin,  but  in  few  cases  can  we  be  sure  they  relate  to  the 
actual  building.  For  example,  there  are  a  number  from  Kigir  Ashur 
which  refer  to  work  at  that  place;  yet  a  careful  study  has  led  me  to 
believe  that  he  lived  somewhat  later.  Perhaps  some  of  the  letters  about 
transport  of  beams  should  be  used,  e.  g.,  K,  746  =  H.  490,  Harper,  Amer. 
Jour.  Sem.  Lang.,  1897,  8;  Johns,  Laws,  342,  from  Ashur  rigua.  In  S. 
760  =  H.  424;  S.  A,  Smith,  Ashurbanipal,  H.  53  if.;  van  Gelderen 
XIX ;  Johns,  Laws,  344,  refers  to  the  Ituai  who  inspected  beams  at  Eziat, 
from  Upahhir  Bel.  K.  491  =  H.  122,  all  the  ivory  (  ?)  in  the  land  sent  to 
Dur  Sharrukin. 

^^Cf.,  e.  g.,  A.  196  ff. 

®*  As  shown  above,  the  data  in  II.  R.  69  under  707  cannot  be  used 
for  the  history  of  the  city.  The  same  document  under  706,  Airu  6, 
says  Dur  Sharrukin  karu.      Now,  whatever  karu  really  does  mean,  it  is 


THE    CULTURE    LIFE  I9I 

a  sacrifice  to  the  gods  and  by  a  great  feast  in  which  the 
princes  of  the  blood  royal,  the  great  officials,  the  scribes  sat 
down.®'* 

Sargon's  great  building  venture  was  never  completed, 
though  the  city  lingered  on.  One  gate  is  without  its  bulls, 
its  inscriptions  are  only  painted,®^  and  the  palace  temple  is 
only  half  finished.®^  The  palace  itself  seems  never  to  have 
been  used  thereafter  as  a  royal  residence,  at  least  there  is  no 
proof  of  such  occupation.  But  mere  natural  decay  was  not 
permitted  to  finish  the  slow  dest.ruction.  The  successors  of 
Sargon  were  vandals,  and  respected  the  palace  of  their  an- 
cestor no  more  than  they  did  those  of  the  dynasty  they  sup- 
planted. Many  of  the  bas-reliefs  still  in  the  palace  have  been 
mutilated  beyond  hope  of  recovery  and  that  by  no  bar- 
iDarian's  hand,  for  the  mutilation  was  caused  by  the  chisel 
of  the  expert.®'  How  many  of  these  were  carried  away  to 
adorn  the  palace  of  Sennacherib  at  Nineveh®^  or  of  his 
successors,  we  do  not  know,  nor  how  many  were  recarved. 
All  we  know  is  that  the  city  lingered  on  until  the  end  of  the 
Assyrian  empire  and  generally  was  known  as  Dur  Sharrukin. 
Then  it  went  to  ruin.  Even  in  the  Middle  Ages,  the  name 
Sarghun  still  lingered,®®  but  by  this  time  a  new  name  had 
come  in.  Persia  had  twice  held  the  supremacy  of  the  East 
and  even  the  second  was  fast  becoming  mythical.    One  of  the 

clear  from  Assyr.  Chron.,  788-87,  and  Rm,  2,  97,  1-2,  that  karu  was 
not  the  ceremonial  dedication  of  a  temple  and  that  it  took  place  before 
it.  Rm.  2,  97,  especially  makes  this  clear  when  it  places  a  second 
karu  in  719,  while  the  corresponding  entrance  of  the  god  is  five  years 
later.      This  agrees  with  the  present  incomplete  state,  see  below. 

»*D.  167  ff. 

"'Place,   181. 

®*  Place,   150. 

"'Place,  68. 

"«  Place,   II.  92. 

^  \  V  inckler,  Sargon,  V. 


192  WESTERN    ASIA    IN    THE    DAYS   OF    SARGON 

few  names  still  remembered  was  Chosroes,  and  to  him  was 
ascribed  the  ruin  under  the  name  of  Khorsabad,  the  "town 
of  Chosroes."  ^^^  So  passed  the  glory  of  Sargon  and  for  long 
centuries  the  only  proof  that  he  had  lived  was  the  dating  of 
a  prophecy  by  a  prophet  in  a  petty  western  kingdom  as  hav- 
ing occurred  in  his  reign.^^^  And  such  is  the  irony  of  fate 
that  even  this  was  not  enough  to  retain  for  him  his  identity, 
for  scholars  long  continued  to  believe  that  he  was  the  same 
as  that  Shalmaneser  whose  throne  he  had  usurped. 

''"  lb. 

'''  Isaiah  2o\ 


..       ^'' THE 


THE 


rifORNj^, 


CORNELL  STUDIES 

IN 

HISTORY  AND  POLITICAL  SCIENCE. 


The  President  White  School  of  History  and  Political 
Science  began  in  1907  the  issue  of  a  series  of  studies  under 
the  foregoing  title.  The  numbers  are  to  appear  at  irregular 
intervals,  each  to  be  complete  and  to  be  bound  separately 
in  cloth.  Henry  Holt  &  Company  are  the  publishers,  to 
whom  all  orders  should  be  addrest.  The  following  num- 
bers have  appeared  up  to  March,  1908. 

Volume  I.  Money  and  Credit  Instruments  in  their 
Relation  to  General  Prices.  Edwin  Walter  Kemmer- 
er,  Ph.D.,  Assistant  Professor  of  Political  Economy  in 
Cornell  University.  172  pp.  1907.  Cloth,  $1.25  net.  By 
mail  $1.31. 

The  subject  of  this  book  is  the  problem  of  the  laws  de- 
termining the  value  of  money.  The  treatment  is  both 
theoretical  and  statistical  ;  the  statistical  results  being 
brought  together  in  a  series  of  charts  which  in  a  striking 
way  support  the  author's  deductiv  conclusions. 

The  author  combines  the  training  of  a  scientific  student 
with  several  years  of  practical  experience  as  currency 
expert  and  financial  adviser  to  the  Philippine  Government 
in  the  work  of  establishing  the  gold  standard  in  the  ilands. 

Volume  II.  W^estern  Asia  in  the  Days  of  Sargon  of 
Assyria,  722-705  B.C.;  A  study  in  Oriental  History. 
Albert  Ten  Eyck  Olmstead,  Ph.D.,  late  Thayer  Fellow, 
American  School  of  Oriental  Studies  at  Jerusalem.  200 
pp.      1908.     Cloth,  $1.25  net.     By  mail  $1.33. 

The  author  has  made  a  methodical  study  of  a  brief 
period  of  Oriental  history.  After  collecting  the  publisht 
Assyrian  data,  he  visited  Syria,  traveled  over  a  large  part 
of  the  lands  and  visited  the  principal  cities  mentioned  by 
the  scribes  of  Sargon.  The  results  are  modifications  of 
the  chronology  and  of  the  topography,  and  new  light  on  a 
number  of  the  unsettled  questions. 


^0m^?'^ 


yr,-  JJ,^^    ^YTE 


RETURN     CIRCULATION  DEPARTMENT 

TO— ►     202  Main  Library 
LOAN  PERIOD  1 
HOME  USE 


ALL  BOOKS  AAAY  BE  RECALLED  AFTER  7  DAYS 

1  month  loans  may  be  renewed  by  calling  64^- J4UD 

I'Zl  cans  may  be  recharged  by  br„;g.r,g  boak.  ,o  Grcula  ,on  De.k 

Renewals  and  recharges  may  be  made  4  doys  pnor  to  due  date 


DUE  AS  STAMPED  BELOW 


■Ian  ^§1984 


m 


■4^ ^ 


UUHld 


^039 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  BERKELEY 
FORM  NO.  DD6,  60m,  12/80        BERKELEY,  CA  94720 


e» 


I       LD21-10»i-5, '48(60618) 


/ 


/' 


»     '» 

■JPS6  3 


